- Arts & Humanities
Evaluation Rubric (Proposal & Defense)
Related documents.
Add this document to collection(s)
You can add this document to your study collection(s)
Add this document to saved
You can add this document to your saved list
Suggest us how to improve StudyLib
(For complaints, use another form )
Input it if you want to receive answer
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .
Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
ORAL DEFENSE RUBRIC
Overall presentation quality ☐ Poorly organized ☐ Poor presentation ☐ Poor communication skills ☐ Slides and handouts difficult to read ☐ Presentation reveals critical weaknesses in depth of knowledge in subject matter ☐ Clearly organized ☐ Clear presentation ☐ Good communication skills ☐ Slides and handouts clear ☐ Presentation demonstrates depth of knowledge in subject matter Quality of response to questions/critical thinking skills ☐ Responses were incomplete ☐ Respondent exhibited lack of knowledge in subject area ☐ Responses did not meet level expected of an MPH graduate ☐ Presentation does not reflect well developed critical thinking skills ☐ Responses were complete ☐ Respondent exhibited adequate knowledge in subject area ☐ Responses met level expected of an MPH graduate ☐ Presentation demonstrates critical thinking skills OVERALL ASSESSMENT ☐ DOES NOT MEET EXPECTATIONS (UNSATISFACTORY) ☐ MEETS EXPECTATIONS (SATISFACTORY)
Related Papers
Prof. Hassan Mohamed Abouelkheir
Introduction: Design of a standardized rubric for measuring student performance in presentations is a critical issue. Materials and Methods: Thirty male students (Group I) and thirty female students (Group II) participated in this study. Likert scale was used (excellent, good, average, and unsatisfactory). It was used against the itemized criteria (introduction, content, slide arrangement, written work, delivery and use of references). Results: high Cronbach's alpha reliability of the rubric was found in either Group I (0.945) or Group II (0.878) where it is slightly higher in the Group I at the 5% level. Corrected item-total correlation for delivery variable in Group I is very weak (0.222) while correlation for reference variable in Group II was averaged (0.525). Conclusion: Group II showed higher delivery performance than Group I as Group I had a lack of English language proficiency, while in Group II, they miss reference citation which can be corrected.
Chinmay Shah
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
Michael Peeters
Ana Sofia Agudelo Muñoz
Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education
Asko Mononen
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to design a rubric instrument for assessing oral presentation performance in higher education and to test its validity with an expert group. Design/methodology/approach This study, using mixed methods, focusses on: designing a rubric by identifying assessment instruments in previous presentation research and implementing essential design characteristics in a preliminary developed rubric; and testing the validity of the constructed instrument with an expert group of higher educational professionals (n=38). Findings The result of this study is a validated rubric instrument consisting of 11 presentation criteria, their related levels in performance, and a five-point scoring scale. These adopted criteria correspond to the widely accepted main criteria for presentations, in both literature and educational practice, regarding aspects as content of the presentation, structure of the presentation, interaction with the audience and presentation delivery. ...
Farah Kalmey
Revista Universidad Eafit
Ana Milena Lopez Restrepo
GMS Journal for Medical Education
Susanne Gerhardt-Szep
Aim: At the annual meeting of German dentists in Frankfurt am Main in 2013, the Working Group for the Advancement of Dental Education (AKWLZ) initiated an interdisciplinary working group to address assessments in dental education. This paper presents an overview of the current work being done by this working group, some of whose members are also actively involved in the German Association for Medical Education's (GMA) working group for dental education. The aim is to present a summary of the current state of research on this topic for all those who participate in the design, administration and evaluation of university-specific assessments in dentistry. Method: Based on systematic literature research, the testing scenarios listed in the National Competency-based Catalogue of Learning Objectives (NKLZ) have been compiled and presented in tables according to assessment value. Results: Different assessment scenarios are described briefly in table form addressing validity (V), reliab...
Rie Koizumi
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
RELATED PAPERS
Research Gate
DR.C.KARTHIKEYAN DR.C.KARTHIKEYAN
Athletic Training Education Journal
Paul Geisler
Assessing Writing
Valerie Meier
Louis Schembri
Nancy Heine
Mohammad Salehi
Medical Education
Martha Elks
Aymen Elsheikh
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Baki Tezcan
Roger Neighbour
T. Singel , Chinmay shah
Xenia Delieza
Journal of Orthodontics & Endodontics
Roula Abiad
Philip Bashook
ainslie martin
Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children
Timothy Slocum
International Educational Research
enceng yana
Fr. Eric Tosi
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Michael Riolo , Jeryl English
Javed Hayat
The American Journal of Surgery
Michael Krausz
Saudi Medical Journal
Mohammed Jan
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
- Find new research papers in:
- Health Sciences
- Earth Sciences
- Cognitive Science
- Mathematics
- Computer Science
- Academia ©2024
- help_outline help
iRubric: Research Project - Oral Defense Rubric
| Rubric Code: By Ready to use Private Rubric Subject: Type: Grade Levels: Undergraduate, Graduate |
| Research Project - Oral Defense | ||||||
| Project Content 50% | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Academic writing 25% | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Oral Presentation (The presenter) 15% | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Overall 10% | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
- Social Sciences; Science
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The gap of knowledge of the study is clearly and specifically stated in paragraph 3 to convince the readers of the need to conduct such study. 7. The research paradigm is able to provide the direction and skeletal framework of the study. 8. The aims/ purposes or objectives were thoroughly presented.
Rubrics for Research Proposal/Oral Defense - Free download as Word Doc (.doc / .docx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or view presentation slides online. This rubrics would be helpful to the teachers or instructors of Research to give fair and just rating to students who will undergo research proposal or oral defense
The purpose of the oral defense of the dissertation proposal is to determine whether the PhD student is adequately prepared t o undertake dissertation research. Assessment Rubric for Defense of Dissertation Proposal . Criteria High Pass (HP) Pass (P) Low Pass (LP) Fail (F) Assessment (HP, P, LP, or F) Student demonstrates ability to state a
Dissertation Proposal Evaluation Rubric Component SLO Fully met (3) Met (2) Partially Met (1) Not met (0) Research problem, questions and significance Score: _____ 2 Thoroughly describes the research problem, precisely identifies research question(s) and describes their significance to equity and advancement of the field of inquiry and
2. Total the scores from each committee member's rubric form for that rubric row, then average them. E.g. Committee Member A scored a 4, Member B scored a 3, Member C scored a 4, so their total is 11 and the average is 3.67. 3. Record this average score on the Thesis Defense Report form in the appropriate "Score by area" cell. Oral Defense:
Thesis/Dissertation ORAL DEFENSE Rubric - Completed by: Date (use M/D/YYYY format): (To be completed by each committee member & reader. ... Builds upon previous research Reasonable theoretical or applied significance Reasonable publication impact Exceptional evidence of discovery Greatly extends previous research
This rubric evaluates a research proposal defense across several criteria in two chapters. Criteria include the rationale, research objectives, hypothesis, literature review, theoretical framework, and significance of the study. For each criterion, points are awarded based on thoroughness, clarity, justification, and proper format. The defense must clearly describe the research design, locale ...
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD Indicators 5 4 3 2 1 1. The research methodology is well-described and is suitable or fitting to the research problem. 2. The participants of the study are well-described in terms of the sample profile, sample size and sampling technique and or procedure. 3.
This document contains a rubric for evaluating research proposal defense presentations. It will be used to assess groups presenting their research proposals on criteria such as the relevance and significance of their research topic, the coherence and organization of their proposal chapters, how prepared and confident the presenters seem, the quality of any visuals used, and the overall ...
Significance ‐ Impact of Proposed Research: (a) Demonstrated the potential value of solution or contribution to the research problem in advancing knowledge (a) within and (b) outside the area/field of study. (b) 5. Research and Design Methods ‐ Solution Approach: Applied sound state‐of‐the‐field research methods/tools to solve the ...
Thesis and Defense (page 1) In determining the overall assessment and the written feedback, committee members should use the relevant rubrics as a guide but may include additional relevant feedback. The overall assessment for the Research Thesis and Defense (Pass with Distinction, Pass, or Fail) should be marked on the form.
GRADUATE STUDENT THESIS/DISSERTATION PROPOSAL EVALUATION. The attached evaluation tool (rubric) is designed to assist program faculty in the evaluation of their degree program's ability to successfully prepare their students to propose graduate research. The rubric includes four broad evaluation criteria, and encourages the addition of ...
Research proposal is a written statement of the research design that includes a statement explaining the objective of the study and a detailed, systematic outline of a particular research methodology. It includes the following key elements: Basic Chapter Content Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 2 - Literature Review Chapter 3 - Research ...
Thesis and Dissertation Proposal Evaluation Rubric Component Proposal overview Justification for hypotheses Supporting evidence Review of relevant research Maintains purpose/focus Methodology Sample Procedures Measures Fully met (3) Effectively and insightfully develops a set of testable, supportable and impactful study hypotheses.
The document provides rubrics for evaluating proposal and oral presentations. The proposal presentation rubric assesses elements like manuscript content and comprehension, presentation grammar and vocabulary, organization of material, sources and documentation, and contribution to research. The oral presentation rubric evaluates delivery and awareness of audience, strength and organization of ...
Page 1 Thesis/Dissertation Proposal and Defense Evaluation Student : _____ Advisor: _____ Date _____ Circle One: Master's Thesis Defense Dissertation Proposal [preliminary examination] Dissertation Defense Committee Members: For purposes of graduate school mandated programmatic assessment, as part of meeting deliberation, the committee is required to fill out the
Download Free PDF. View PDF. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. Assessing oral presentation performance. 2017 •. Asko Mononen. Purpose The purpose of this paper is to design a rubric instrument for assessing oral presentation performance in higher education and to test its validity with an expert group.
This document contains rubrics for evaluating a practical research final defense at Caraga National High School in Davao Oriental, Philippines. The rubrics assess chapters in the research covering the introduction, methods, results and discussion, and summary/conclusion. Areas of evaluation include significance of the research topic, literature review, research design, data analysis, findings ...
Title Defense Rubric Sample - Free download as Word Doc (.doc / .docx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. This document outlines the scoring rubric for a research defense presentation. It will be evaluated based on four main criteria: content, organization, presentation/delivery, and fielding questions. Within each category are multiple items that will be scored on a ...
Action Research Final Report Rubric (Revised 5/23/17) NOTE TO REVIEWERS: A score of zero should be entered for missing criteria. ... (Revisions from Proposal Plan) • Revisions made to the proposal: •Did not address most reviewer comments and suggestions for improvement of the learning need, content, guiding question, classroom and student ...
URC PINS proposal evaluation rubric. strong case is made for the novelty and importance of the research. Excellent: The proposed work is highly original and the results are expected to be important in the specific field of research, and perhaps even beyond. Good: The proposed research or scholarly work is novel and that the work is interesting ...
Exemplary understanding of the presented issue (s) by thoroughly and correctly (1) addressing the relevant content, (2)identifying and addressing the key concepts or main ideas, (3) substantiating points with several accurate examples. All of the points in the Project Proposal were included in the oral report.
Graduate School of Education: Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership. Dissertation Proposal Rubric: 5-part dissertation (with edits by Dannelle D. Stevens, Coordinator and Gayle Thieman, Doctoral Program Committee Member) Score every dimension: Unsatisfactory = 1; Emerging = 2; Proficient = 3; Exemplary = 4.