iRubric: Oral Argument rubric

Main points work and are clearly distinguished with supporting details. Transitions are effectively used for coherent movement from point to point.

General organization wasn't clear or well-developed. Transitions were okay, but not as unique or distinct as the could be.

The elements of the argument lacked detail to the extent that some argumentative impact was compromised. Transitions need work.

The argument was difficult to follow due to a lack of organization. Little detail was given to support the main points. Difficult to identify introduction, body, and conclusion.

Alerted panel to the argument conclusion. The speaker summarized the main points, tied back to the introduction to bring the argument full circle, and left the panel with a specific call to action and a powerful clincher.

Alerted panel to the argument conclusion. The speaker recapped main points but missed at least one key component of conclusion.

Ending was weak or not present; the speaker concluded the argument in a disorganized fashion. Two or more important components were not present.

No conclusion; Ended suddenly. Most parts of conclusion were missing.

Natural variation of vocal characteristics (pace, pitch, power, pauses, articulation) to heighten interest and match message appropriately. Few, if any, verbal fillers.
Consistently and effectively used eye contact to establish rapport with panel. Rarely used speaker notes and and showed interaction with jury.

Some limited variation of vocal characteristics. Use of pace, pitch, power and pauses seemed inconsistent at times. Some verbal fillers.
The speaker looked up occasionally during the speech. Some use of speaker notes. Seemed a bit disengaged from jury for short periods of time.

The student could be heard most of the time but at certain points were inaudible and/or inarticulate. Little pitch variation. Pacing was too slow/fast. Verbal fillers were noticeable and frequent.
Obvious use of speaker notes. Seems disengaged from jury for noticeable periods of time.

Audience had difficulty hearing and/or understanding much of the speech due to monotone or inappropriate variation of vocal characteristics. Inconsistent with verbal message. Excessive fluency errors interfered with message comprehension. Excessive use of vocalized fillers.
The speaker seldom looked at the jury. Reads speech from notes. Avoided eye contact with jury. Only occasional and sporadic glances.