iRubric: Presentations rubric

Video did not meet time requirements.
Speaking was unclear and uncomfortable. Presentation had major audio problems.
Eye contact extremely poor.
Presentation was submitted late.
Presenter's appearance was unprofessional and they sounded unsure of their topic.
Omission of discussion of propaganda theories, techniques and concepts.
Little or no discussion of desired results or effectiveness.
No suggestions for improvement.

Video met time requirements.
Speaking was somewhat clear and somewhat comfortable. Presentation's volume too high or too low.
Eye contact fair.
Presentation was submitted on time.
Presenter's appearance was acceptable but they weren't too convincing.
Minimal discussion of propaganda theories, techniques and concepts.
A cursory discussion of desired results or effectiveness.
No suggestions for improvements.

Video met time requirements.
Speaking was clear and comfortable with appropriate volume. Slight background noise.
Eye contact was acceptable.
Presentation submitted on time.
Presenter's appearance was acceptable and they sounded somewhat credible.
Discussion of propaganda theories related to effects, reactions, counterpropaganda, etc.
Student offers vague or no improvements to maximize effectiveness of message

Video met time requirements.
Speaking was clear and presenter was comfortable. Appropriate volume
and no background noise.
Eye contact excellent.
Presentation submitted on time.
Presenter's appearance was professional and they sounded credible.
Clear, logical discussion of several propaganda theories related to effects, reactions, counterpropaganda, etc.
Student offers specific improvements to maximize effectiveness of message

Viewer was left without an understanding of the topic.
The presentation was unengaging and viewer was disconnected.
Viewer felt the presenter was unsupportive and excluded their interests.

Viewer understood partial points of the topic.
Viewer found parts of the presentation somewhat interesting and engaging.
Viewer felt the presenter was somewhat supportive but topic was not interesting.

Viewer was left with a general understanding of the topic.
The presentation was somewhat engaging to the viewer.
Viewer found the presentation to be mostly interesting.
Viewer felt the presenter was supportive but topic didn't address their interests.

Viewer was left with a strong understanding of the topic.
The presentation engaged the viewer and was very interesting to the viewer.
Viewer felt the presenter was supportive and included their interests.