iRubric: Panel Presentation EVALUAION rubric

(draft) edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

Panel Presentation EVALUAION

Engineering Ethics: Panel Presentations Fall 09

Rubric Code: P2BA7A

By pereau

Draft

Public Rubric

Subject: Engineering

Type: Presentation

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Panel Presentation Enter rubric description
	So-so 1 pts	Okay-Good 2 pts	Really Good 3 pts
Content
Team Introduction weight = 2	So-so Introduction confined to subject of presentation.	Okay-Good Introduction clearly states presentation topic and lists team members.	Really Good Introduction clearly defines subject and lists team members. Presentation's relevance to class also clearly stated.
Facts explaining topic weight = 6	So-so Most relevant facts presented. Some relevant facts or actors omitted. Outcome(s) identified but incomplete.	Okay-Good Sufficient facts presented to make topic understood. Most actors identified. Obvious outcome(s) presented.	Really Good Relevant facts presented including information not widely known/understood. Relevant actors and their roles clearly identified. Topic's relevance to class or profession clearly articulated.
Identified ethical issues weight = 7	So-so Ethical issues not well drawn in terms of the presentation topics, choices, results, or actors.	Okay-Good Ethical issues identified accurately. Ethical issues related clearly to the panel presentation topic.	Really Good Ethical issues identified and related in a thought-provoking manner to panel topic. Ethical issues explained in terms of moral models, values choices, actors, and consequences.
Identified values weight = 7	So-so Identified some values for major players in case. Mentioned possible ethical models.	Okay-Good Identified all values operating for parties/actors in presentation topic. Indicated the ethical model(s) in operation.	Really Good Identified all values and ethical models operating in topic situation. Presented alternative positions, alternative value sets, or other ethical frame works.
Presentation Effectiveness
Presentation structure weight = 3	So-so Some debaters not well organized individually. Presenters jumped from point to point, making it hard to follow. Presenters read from notes or screen.	Okay-Good Panel generally presented well organized information. Presenters able to convey information without reading from notes or screen	Really Good Panel presenters all gave clear and well organized information, w/o reading from screen or notes. Presentation flowed together smoothly, from background to issues to conclusions.
Visual Aids weight = 2	So-so Text and illustrations not appropriate, or badly organized, or unrelated to facts or arguments.	Okay-Good Text clear, concise. Some illustrations help fill out facts and arguments.	Really Good Text and illustrations contribute to panel presentation and to the understanding of ethical issues. Graphics are clear, original and creative additions to the presentation.
Team work weight = 2	So-so Panel members only somewhat involved. One team member dominates discussion or clearly dominated work on the presentation.	Okay-Good All team members clearly contribute equally to the research and participate fully in the presentation.	Really Good All team members contribute equally to the research and take part in the presentation. Each member fully informed about all issues of case and argument.
Questions weight = 4	So-so Panel presentation was complete but team members were not able to answer questions clearly.	Okay-Good Presentation was complete and the team responded adequately to questions from the class.	Really Good After the presentation, the panel responded to questions by clearly repeating the facts, expanding on the information, and underlining the ethical issues in the topic.
Sources & submission weight 1 (given by professor)	So-so Sources not cited or hardcopy of presentation not submitted.	Okay-Good Sources cited and hardcopy of presentation submitted to professor at time of presentation.	Really Good Sources cited, including unusual ones; hardcopy and electronic copy of presentation submitted to professor at time of presentation.

Subjects:

Engineering

Types:

Presentation

Discuss this rubric