Scribd
Upload
35 views1 page

KIX2004 Rubrics For Oral Presentation

This document provides a marking rubric for an engineering project oral presentation. It evaluates students on the content of their presentation (50%), which includes providing a comprehensive background, clear problem statement and justification, precise objectives and scope, and a highly relevant proposed solution. It also evaluates their presentation skills (40%), such as delivering a clear and well-organized presentation with excellent speaking mannerisms and professional slides. Finally, it evaluates their ability to answer questions about the project (10%).

Uploaded by

Syamil Fikri - UM
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
35 views1 page

KIX2004 Rubrics For Oral Presentation

This document provides a marking rubric for an engineering project oral presentation. It evaluates students on the content of their presentation (50%), which includes providing a comprehensive background, clear problem statement and justification, precise objectives and scope, and a highly relevant proposed solution. It also evaluates their presentation skills (40%), such as delivering a clear and well-organized presentation with excellent speaking mannerisms and professional slides. Finally, it evaluates their ability to answer questions about the project (10%).

Uploaded by

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

Engineering Project Management (KIX2004)

Marking Rubrics for Oral Presentation

Student Group: _________________ Programme: ______________

Item Criteria Poor Medium Excellent Allocated


(Scale of 1) (Scale of 2.5) (Scale of 5) Mark
Background Totally irrelevant Overall good Comprehensive
(5 marks) background. background. Problem background. Problem
Problem is not definition is definition is very clear
defined and out of moderately clear.
context.

Justification/ Not justified at all Average justification Very well justified.


Problem
Statement
Content
(10 marks)
(50%)
Scope/Objectives Vague, too general Good but little Very precise and clear,
(5 marks) and not achievable. modification required, specific and
specific, achievable. achievable.

Proposed Not relevant at all Relevant. Highly relevant with the


Solution with the objectives objectives
(30 marks)

Presentation Clarity Not clear at all Clear but can be Very clear, no
Skill (40%) (5 marks) improved. confusion.

Organization Not well organized at Organized but can be Very well organized.
(10 marks) all improved.

Delivery Very poor Good presentation Extraordinary


(10 marks) presentation, skill with eye contact. presentation skill with
disjointed eye contact and very
presentation, no eye professional.
contact.

Slides Slides of very poor Acceptable clear Outstanding slides with


(10 marks) quality. slides. diagram, tables,
appropriate number of
words.

Time Less than 10 Within 15 minutes but Within 15 minutes,


(5 marks) minutes. rush through. completed as planned.

Question (10 marks) Unable to answer Able to answer Question(s) answered


and Answer question(s). question(s) without with elaboration and
(10%) elaboration able to relate to the
project.

Total (100%)

10% Score

Signature: ___________________________________

Name of Lecturer: _____________________________

Date: _______________________________________

You might also like