Scribd
Upload
65 views

Oral Presentation Assessment Example

The document provides a rubric for assessing oral presentations by student groups. It will assess four student groups on criteria such as the effectiveness of their introduction, organization, technical content, clarity of key points, use of visual aids, speaker behavior, conclusion/recommendations, and handling of questions. Each group criteria is worth 50% of the overall grade. For each group member, their individual quality in terms of knowledge, clarity and explanation is also assessed and worth 50% of the overall grade. Scores from 1 to 5 will be provided for each criteria based on a scale from poor to excellent.

Uploaded by

armando.chappell1005
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
65 views

Oral Presentation Assessment Example

The document provides a rubric for assessing oral presentations by student groups. It will assess four student groups on criteria such as the effectiveness of their introduction, organization, technical content, clarity of key points, use of visual aids, speaker behavior, conclusion/recommendations, and handling of questions. Each group criteria is worth 50% of the overall grade. For each group member, their individual quality in terms of knowledge, clarity and explanation is also assessed and worth 50% of the overall grade. Scores from 1 to 5 will be provided for each criteria based on a scale from poor to excellent.

Uploaded by

armando.chappell1005
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Assessment for Oral Presentations

GroupNumber:__1_
Foreachcriteria,thegroupandthestudentwillbeassessedoutof5usingthefollowingscale
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Very Good
Excellent

1
2
3
4
5

GroupAssessment(50%)
Description

Marks
(a)

Wastheintroductioneffectiveandinformative?
Wastheoverallpresentationwellorganizedandeasytofollow?
Wasthetechnicalcontentgood,includingclearandjustifiableassumptions,methodology,relevant
conclusions,etc?
Werethekeypointsandquestionsofthecasestudyclearlystated?
Werethevisualaids,e.g.,slides,overheads,etc.,wereclear,effectiveandwellused?
Wasthespeakersbehavior,volume,andmannerofspeakingwereeffectiveandclear?
Weretheconclusionsand/orrecommendationsdrewthingstogetherwell?
Weretheteachersquestionswerehandledwell?

GROUPOVERALLGRADE:___________
TeamMemberAssessment(50%)
TeamMember

VictorJulioEspinozaValverde(D)
GladysAnitaSanaviaTasayco
RuthHuarcayaChacon
BlancaGarciaShiraishi
CarolinaMateoJurado
AnaKatiaBarbozaRosado

Quality(b)

FinalMark

(knowledge,clarity
andexplanation)

(0.5*a+0.5*b)*4

Assessment for Oral Presentations


GroupNumber:2
Foreachcriteria,thegroupandthestudentwillbeassessedoutof5usingthefollowingscale
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Very Good
Excellent

1
2
3
4
5

GroupAssessment(50%)
Description

Marks
(a)

Wastheintroductioneffectiveandinformative?
Wastheoverallpresentationwellorganizedandeasytofollow?
Wasthetechnicalcontentgood,includingclearandjustifiableassumptions,methodology,relevant
conclusions,etc?
Werethekeypointsandquestionsofthecasestudyclearlystated?
Werethevisualaids,e.g.,slides,overheads,etc.,wereclear,effectiveandwellused?
Wasthespeakersbehavior,volume,andmannerofspeakingwereeffectiveandclear?
Weretheconclusionsand/orrecommendationsdrewthingstogetherwell?
Weretheteachersquestionswerehandledwell?
GROUPOVERALLGRADE:___________
TeamMemberAssessment(50%)
TeamMember

CarlosVelaRuiz(D)
VanessaTorres
MariaDelgado
BeatrizQuijanoAranda
IndiraOjedaSaico

Quality(b)

FinalMark

(knowledge,clarity
andexplanation)

(0.5*a+0.5*b)*4

Assessment for Oral Presentations


GroupNumber:3
Foreachcriteria,thegroupandthestudentwillbeassessedoutof5usingthefollowingscale
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Very Good
Excellent

1
2
3
4
5

GroupAssessment(50%)
Description

Marks
(a)

Wastheintroductioneffectiveandinformative?
Wastheoverallpresentationwellorganizedandeasytofollow?
Wasthetechnicalcontentgood,includingclearandjustifiableassumptions,methodology,relevant
conclusions,etc?
Werethekeypointsandquestionsofthecasestudyclearlystated?
Werethevisualaids,e.g.,slides,overheads,etc.,wereclear,effectiveandwellused?
Wasthespeakersbehavior,volume,andmannerofspeakingwereeffectiveandclear?
Weretheconclusionsand/orrecommendationsdrewthingstogetherwell?
Weretheteachersquestionswerehandledwell?
GROUPOVERALLGRADE:___________
TeamMemberAssessment(50%)
TeamMember

MiguelPrimodelaTorre
CarlosJassoGarcia
OdalisInguanseVizcarra

Quality(b)

FinalMark

(knowledge,clarity
andexplanation)

(0.5*a+0.5*b)*4

KarlyNavarroCotrina
MarisolJaureguiGomez

Assessment for Oral Presentations


GroupNumber:4
Foreachcriteria,thegroupandthestudentwillbeassessedoutof5usingthefollowingscale
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Very Good
Excellent

1
2
3
4
5

GroupAssessment(50%)
Description

Marks
(a)

Wastheintroductioneffectiveandinformative?
Wastheoverallpresentationwellorganizedandeasytofollow?
Wasthetechnicalcontentgood,includingclearandjustifiableassumptions,methodology,relevant
conclusions,etc?
Werethekeypointsandquestionsofthecasestudyclearlystated?
Werethevisualaids,e.g.,slides,overheads,etc.,wereclear,effectiveandwellused?
Wasthespeakersbehavior,volume,andmannerofspeakingwereeffectiveandclear?
Weretheconclusionsand/orrecommendationsdrewthingstogetherwell?
Weretheteachersquestionswerehandledwell?

GROUPOVERALLGRADE:___________
TeamMemberAssessment(50%)
TeamMember

Quality(b)

FinalMark

(knowledge,clarity
andexplanation)
EdithLeonSilvera
JazminEspinozaGutierrez
RicardoBellidoLinares
JessicaUrdialesCrisoul
FabrizioVillarH.

(0.5*a+0.5*b)*4

You might also like