- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Philosophy Debate 2020 (Affirmative Team) rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Philosophy Debate 2020 (Affirmative Team) PhotoShop Assessment Oxford Style Debate for Chapter\s: Intersubjectivity and/or Human Society Rubric Code: F2XWCAX By RUBENJOHN Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Philosophy Type: Assessment Grade Levels: 6-8, 9-12

Criteria
	Exceeding Outcomes (N/A)	Meeting Outcomes (N/A)	Working Toward Outcomes (N/A)	Did not meet outcomes (N/A)
ORGANIZATION AND CLARITY Main arguments and responses are outlined in a clear and orderly way	Exceeding Outcomes Completely clear and orderly presentation (18 points)	Meeting Outcomes Mostly clear and orderly in all parts (16 points)	Working Toward Outcomes Clear in some parts but not overall (14 points)	Did not meet outcomes Unclear and disorganized throughout. (9 points)
USE OF ARGUMENTS Reasons are given to support the resolution.	Exceeding Outcomes Foolproof and persuasive arguments given throughout. (18 points)	Meeting Outcomes Many good arguments given, with only minor problems. (16 points)	Working Toward Outcomes Some decent arguments but some significant difficulties. (14 points)	Did not meet outcomes Few or no real arguments given or all arguments given had significant problems. (9 points)
USE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL Identification of weakness in the negative team's arguments and ability to defend itself against attack.	Exceeding Outcomes Excellent cross-examination and defense given against negative team's objections. (18 points)	Meeting Outcomes Good cross-examination and rebuttals given with only minor slip-ups. (16 points)	Working Toward Outcomes Decent cross-examinations and/or rebuttals given, but with some significant problems. (14 points)	Did not meet outcomes Poor cross-examinations and/or rebuttals, failure to point out problems in negative team's position or failure to defend itself against attacks. (9 points)
PRESENTATION STYLE Tone of voice, clarity of expression, precision of arguments, all contributes in keeping the audience's attention and persuading them of the team's case.	Exceeding Outcomes All style features were used convincingly. (6 points)	Meeting Outcomes Most style features were used convincingly. (4 points)	Working Toward Outcomes Few style features were used convincingly. (2 points)	Did not meet outcomes Very few style features were used, none of them convincingly. (1 point)