Preparedness / Well prepared and has obviously rehearsed; uses allotted time well / Seems reasonably prepared, but needed additional rehearsals for confidence and smoothness of presentation / Somewhat prepared, but adequate rehearsal is lacking as transitions are difficult, mechanisms of working with slides absence and timing awkward / Does not seem at all prepared for the presentation; runs well over or under time
Enthusiasm / Demonstrates interest and zeal / Audience engaged / Speaker only moderately engagedsomewhat interested in topic but mostly rote/mechanical delivery / Speaker disengagedappears unhappy to be presenting
Speaking acumen / Speaks clearly and distinctly (100-95% of time)
Projects voice well (heard by all 100% of time)
Mispronounces no words
Pace of presentation is comfortable and consistent / Speaks clearly and distinctly (100-95% of time)
Voice projection very good (heard by all over 90% of time)
Mispronounces a few words
Paced slightly fast, slow, or inconsistent / Generally speaks clearly and distinctly (94-85% of time)
Projection only fair (heard by all 80-90 % of time)
Mispronounces a few words
Paced too fast, slow, or distractingly variable / Cannot be understood.
Speaker may mumble, regularly mispronounce words, fail to project voice well and consistently (e.g. volume may be low or lapse as when facing the board), or pace to quickly, slowly, or variably
Behavior (mannerisms) / Acts relaxed or poised; scans full audience while speaking; rare extenders, checking, or fidgets; speaks to audience engagingly / Somewhat nervous; rare use of extenders but may perform checking (e.g. “ok’s”); minor fidgets; little reading of slides / Looks mainly at one person or spot; uses extenders and fidgets but not to excess; clearly notrehearsed; relies on slide text / Reads slides; does not talk to or look at audience; fidgets; punctuates sentences with meaningless extenders (e.g. “um”)
Quality of visuals / Clean, sharp, easy to comprehend, striking, enhances the presentation; borrowed graphics have a source citation / Colors and orientation well done; too many words or too cluttered visuals; missing some source citations / Wordy, hard to read; too many visuals and too cluttered; no source citations / No visuals; visuals so poorly prepared as to be detrimental to the presentation
Content / Presents material new to class that is relevant to course topic and learning goals / Low relevance or importance of material (e.g. overly redundant with lectures, off topic or not well connected to course goals) / Overly focused on descriptive irrelevancies (i.e. not illustrative of concepts; knowledge over information) / Audience exits with little gain of career-relevant information, knowledge, or skills
Scholarship / Clearly 4 or more sources; shows full understanding of topic / Use of multiple sources evident from content inclusion; shows good understanding of topic / Over-emphasis on a single source;
shows limited understanding of topic / No scholarship evident beyond “gimmees” (easily obtained web dross or popular pieces, low scholarly quality); shows littleunderstanding of topic
Synthesis / Integrates across disciplinary bounds; takes the topic in novel direction or applies information and knowledge framework to problem-solving / Connects knowledge to build a conceptual framework but with little evidence of novelty / Crafts information into knowledge, connects across environmental gradients or physiological systems / Topic is singular or low dimension and is mainly descriptive information
Point total
BESC 320 Group Project and Oral Presentation Rubric