Name: Score:

Oral Presentation Rubric

10—Excellent 8—Good 6—Fair 4—Needs Improvement
Accessibility • Students used little or no • Students used jargon • Students used jargon • Students used
of Language jargon and defined terms frequently and defined without explanation, but jargon throughout and/or
without prodding. terms without prodding. when asked could define could not explain terms
terms when asked.

Delivery • Holds attention of entire • Consistent use of direct • Displays minimal eye • Holds no eye contact with
audience with the use of eye contact with contact with audience, audience, as entire report
direct eye contact, audience, but still returns while reading mostly is read from notes
seldom looking at notes to notes from the notes • Speaks in low volume
• Speaks with fluctuation • Speaks with • Speaks in uneven volume and/ or monotonous tone,
in volume and inflection satisfactory variation with little or no which causes audience to
to maintain audience of volume and inflection disengage
interest inflection
and emphasize key points
Content/ • Demonstrates full • Is at ease with • Is uncomfortable with • Does not have grasp of
Organization knowledge by expected answers to information and is able information and
answering all class all questions, without to answer only cannot answer
questions elaboration rudimentary questions questions about
with explanations and • Has somewhat clear • Attempts to define subject
elaboration purpose and subject; purpose and subject; • Does not clearly define
• Provides clear purpose and some examples, facts, provides subject and purpose;
subject; pertinent and/or statistics that weak examples, facts, provides weak or no
examples, facts, and/or support the subject; and/ or statistics, which support of subject; gives
statistics; supports includes some data or do not adequately support insufficient support for
conclusions/ideas with evidence that supports the subject; includes very ideas or conclusions
evidence conclusions thin
data or evidence
 Visuals • Visuals were • Visuals were of good • Visuals were of uneven • Visuals were confusing,
professional and quality and helped tell quality; some parts were unprofessional, and/or not
memorable; in case of the story of the good and others not clearly relevant
poster presentation, research. • Did not use visuals: In the
poster is visually case of talks, visuals are
accessible with minimal optional. If visuals were not
text and few and used in a talk, then this
clearly understandable criterion will be scored
based on the judge’s
graphics; in case of
assessment of whether
alternative media,
visuals were needed.
visual demonstration of
the alternative media is
incorporated into the
maximum five-minute
talk in a clear and
logical manner; in case
of talks accompanied by
slides, the slides are
visually accessible with
minimal text and few
and clearly
understandable
graphics.
Relevance • Student clearly • Student articulated • Student seemed unsure • Student did not attempt to
articulated importance importance in a general about the importance of articulate importance.
and
by referring to a specific sense. their topic/concept.
Importance
topic/concept, student
clearly articulated the
relevant objective/s of
the work on the
intended audience
Enthusiasm/ • Demonstrates strong • Shows some • Shows little or mixed • Shows no interest in
Audience enthusiasm about topic enthusiastic feelings feelings about the topic presented
during entire about topic topic being presented • Fails to increase
Awareness
presentation • Raises audience • Raises audience audience understanding
• Significantly increases understanding and understanding and of knowledge of topic
audience understanding awareness of most knowledge of some
and knowledge of topic; points points
convinces an audience to
recognize the validity
and
importance of the subject
Comments