Course:FNH499/oralpresentation
Knowledge and Content:
Category/Rating | Poor (0-3) | Acceptable (3.5) | Good (4) | Excellent (5) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Adequacy of Introduction | Introduction and background information was unfocussed; audience did not know what the objectives of the presentation were. | Audience had an idea of the focus and objectives of the presentation, but some of the background was either missing or irrelevant. | Captured audience attention; presented adequate background; objectives were clear by the end of the introduction. | Captured audience attention; presented relevant background, quickly established a focus, and clearly stated objectives of the presentation. |
Explanation of experimental approach and methodology | Presented procedures used without demonstrating why those methods were chosen or an understanding of the principles. | Presented overview of experimental approach, and described methods to be used. | Presented details of the chosen experimental approach; accurate description of main principles and key steps of methods. | Gave clear rationale and details for the chosen experimental approach; accurate description of main principles and key steps of methods. |
Explanation of results | Data was not presented clearly, and/or incorrect explanations of the results were given. | Presented the data obtained from each of the methods; made a good attempt to explain the results. | Presented the data obtained from each of the methods clearly; explained the meaning of each of these results. | Presented the data obtained from each of the methods clearly; provided meaningful interpretation and inter-connections of results. |
Clarity & accuracy of discussion; Critical judgement exercised | Did not show any understanding of the significance and limitations of the research findings. | Gave a good effort to explain the significance and limitations of the research findings. | Demonstrated good understanding of the significance and limitations of the research findings. | Articulated critical judgement and good understanding of the significance and limitations of the research findings. |
Appropriateness of conclusion and take-home message | Ended the presentation abruptly; or a conclusion was presented that did not reflect the main points of the presentation. | Summarized main points of the presentation; audience left with a take-home message. | Summarized main points of the presentation; audience left with a clear take-home message; presentation concluded logically. | Summarized main points in an integrated fashion; audience left with a clear take-home message; presentation concluded logically. |
Responses to questions | Lacked accurate or relevant answers to most of the questions asked. | Made strong effort to answer questions, and handled most questions knowledgeably, but with some hesitation. | Handled most questions knowledgeably and with confidence. | Handled questions knowledgeably and with confidence; demonstrated greater depth of knowledge than what was presented. |
Organization and Delivery:
Category/Rating | Poor (0-3) | Acceptable (3.5) | Good (4) | Excellent (5) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Flow of information | Presentation of information is disconnected; audience found it difficult to understand the main points and to follow the presentation. | Logical organization of information; some gaps or pauses in the transitions between sub-topics of group members. | Smooth and logical organization of information; transitions between sub-topics and group members were mostly effective. | Smooth and logical organization of information; effective bridging between sub-topics and among group members; easy to follow. |
Effectiveness of delivery | Reading extensively from notes or the monitor; no eye contact with audience; low volume &/or speaking in a monotone. | Spoke in a clear voice at an acceptable pace; occasionally relying on notes or the monitor; made some eye contact with the audience. | Spoke clearly, with good volume and intonation and at a good pace; established good eye contact with the audience. | Spoke clearly and confidently, with good volume and intonation and at a good pace; excellent eye contact with the audience. |
Enthusiasm, professionalism | Apathetic presentation of information; distracting gestures, inappropriate demeanor and/or frequent use of slang or colloquialism. | Demonstrated interest for the topic; occasional distracting gestures or inappropriate choice of words. | Demonstrated enthusiasm for the topic; conveyed professionalism in language and demeanor. | Demonstrated a passion for the topic and instilled interest in the audience; conveyed professionalism in language and demeanor. |
Use of visual aids | Most visual aids were too "busy", &/or had text with too small font size or verbatim to speaker's presentation. | Visual aids were used to convey information to the audience; some slides may have been difficult to understand or see clearly. | Visual aids were attractive and effectively used to clearly convey information to the audience. | A variety of visual aids was used to capture the attention of the audience and enhance understanding of the presented information. |
Adherence to time limit | Presentation was longer than 18 minutes or shorter than 12 minutes. | Kept to within three minutes of the prescribed 15 minute time limit. | Kept to within two minutes of the prescribed 15 minute time limit. | Kept to within a minute of the prescribed 15 minute time limit. |