iRubric: Team Presentation Evaluation Form rubric

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

Team Presentation Evaluation Form

Groups will present on a Nonprofit organization. Objective is to inform about the organization and persuaded people to donate money to your cause.

Rubric Code: Z599B7

By bbisci59

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Communication

Type: Presentation

Grade Levels: 9-12

Team Presentation Evaluation Form Enter rubric description
	Excellent 10 pts	Good 9 pts	Average 8 pts	Poor 7 pts	Comments (N/A)
Organization Coherence Road Signs	Excellent Consistently clear, concise, well organized. Points were easy to follow because of the organization. Transitions between sections & speakers smooth and coordinated.	Good Consistently clear, concise, well organized. Points were easy to follow because of the organization. Transitions between sections & speakers smooth and oordinated.	Average Not always clear or concise. Organization was adequate, but weak. Occasionally wandered and was sometimes difficult to follow. Transitions between sections & speakers weak.	Poor Often unclear and disorganized, rambled too much. The presentation was confusing and difficult to follow. Transitions between sections & speakers awkward.	Comments
Topic Knowledge	Excellent Displayed an excellent grasp of the material. Demonstrated excellent mastery of content, application and implications. Excellent research depth	Good Displayed a general grasp of the material. Demonstrated good mastery of content, application and implications. Good research depth.	Average Displayed some grasp of the material. Demonstrated adequate mastery of content, application and implications. Research not very deep.	Poor Displayed a poor grasp of the material. Demonstrated a superficial handling of content, application and implications. Little depth of research.	Comments
Visual Aids & Handouts	Excellent Simple, clear, easy to interpret, easy to read. Well coordinated with content, well designed, used very effectively. Excellent example of how to prepare and use good visual aids	Good Usually clear, easy to interpret, easy to read. Generally well coordinated with content, design was okay, generally used effectively. Demonstrated some understanding of how to use visual aids.	Average Marginally acceptable, too complex, crowded, difficult to read or interpret. Adequate coordination with content. Used only adequately. Showed little understanding of how to prepare and use visual aids.	Poor Poor quality visual aids (or none), hard to read, technically inaccurate, poorly constructed. Poor coordination with content. Used poorly. The presenter did not seem to know how to prepare or use visual aids effectively.	Comments
Creativity	Excellent Very creative and original. Imaginative design and use of materials. Novel handouts, visual aids, or methods.	Good Exhibited some originality and creativity.	Average Routine treatment, minimal thought given to originality or creativity.	Poor Lacked creativity. Very ordinary and mundane.	Comments
Summary	Excellent Clear, concise, major points emphasized, clear recommendations, strong conclusion or call for action.	Good Referred to main points, recommendations weak or missing, weak conclusion or call for action.	Average Vague mention of major points, no recommendations, weak conclusion, weak or no call for action.	Poor No summary, no recommendations, no conclusions, no call for action. "That's it."	Comments
"Choreography" of Team Continuity	Excellent Excellent stage presence. Confident, used notes well, at ease, excellent gestures, good audience attention, good eye contact. Smooth transitions between speakers in every case.	Good Good stage presence. Fairly confident, used notes fairly well, good gestures, acceptable audience attention and eye contact. Mostly smooth transitions between speakers.	Average Adequate stage presence. Read parts, fumbled with notes, several distracting mannerisms, minimal gestures, minimal eye contact, too many ums. Awkward transitions between speakers.	Poor Poor stage presence. Unprepared, awkward, shuffled papers, poor eye contact, lots of ums, turned from audience to read screens, shuffled feet, fidgeted. Poor gestures & transitions between speakers.	Comments
Works Cited	Excellent Outline submitted covered all material used in the presentation Formatted correctly Bibliography correctly formatted	Good Good outline needed some additional information	Average adequate outline	Poor poor outline missing many items identified in the criteria	Comments
Pathos	Excellent Effectively and ethically appeals to audience emotions (anger, status, power, fear, compassion, etc.) to achieve the persuasive goal. Vivid and emotive language effectively used to create imagery to engage audience	Good ppeals to audience emotions (anger, fear, compassion, status, etc.) to achieve the persuasive goal, but fails to use enough pathos to really move audience, didn't completely observe ethical responsibilities. Creates some effective imagery through language.	Average Minimal appeal to audience emotions (anger, fear, status, compassion, etc.) for persuasive goal; fails to observe ethical responsibilities. Creates some effective imagery through language.	Poor Fails to appropriately appeal to audience emotions. No attempt to use vivid or descriptive language to capture audience emotions. Fallacies used instead of ethical appeals.	Comments
LOGOS (logical appeal) Logical reasoning and support to claim (statistics, facts, expert testimony-quotes-, etc...)	Excellent Presents sound arguments to support major claim. Arguments are supported with sufficient, relevant and valid evidence. Reasoning is free of fallacies.Addressed oppositional arguments in a fair and persuasive manner. All four sources are cited aloud and are credible.	Good Some arguments are sufficiently supported but some unsupported assertions are also present. Minor reasoning present. Oppositional argument somewhat addressed. Most sources are credible and cited aloud.	Average Arguments lack some relevant and solid evidence. Credibility of sources and/or information is questionable. Many fallacies are present in the reasoning. Oppositional arguments not present or not very apparent. Less than two sources are credible and/or cited aloud.	Poor Arguments lack relevant and valid evidence. Information is incorrect and/or outdated. Many fallacies are present in the reasoning. Sources either aren't credible or not cited in presentation.	Comments
Delivery Eye contact Delivery, elocution, and body language	Excellent Verbal Delivery is rehearsed. Volume is controlled. Wording was chosen. Words are articulated. Pace is appropriate. Body language is subtle and fitting for topic	Good One of the following is not present: Verbal Delivery is rehearsed. Volume is controlled. Wording was chosen. Words are articulated. Pace is appropriate. Body language is okay and fitting for topic	Average Poor Two of the following are not present: Verbal Delivery is rehearsed. Volume is controlled. Wording was chosen. Words are articulated. Pace is appropriate. Body language is distracting from the speech	Poor No rehearsal or organization to delivery; words and directions not thought out. Body language detracts from speech.	Comments

Subjects:

Communication

Types:

Presentation

Discuss this rubric