Review criteria for each section and select the most appropriate level for each section.
Remember, 5 (Superb) should be reserved for exceptional presentations.
Clearly deficient (1)
Background information is irrelevant or poorly summarized. No connections to previous literature or broader issues. Goals and hypotheses are unclear or absent.
Less than adequate (2)
Background information lacks relevance or clarity. Limited connections to previous literature and broader issues. Goals and hypotheses are vaguely stated with unclear relevance.
Adequate (3)
Background information is adequately summarized. Some connections to previous literature and broader issues are evident. Goals and hypotheses are stated with some clarity and relevance.
More than adequate (4)
Background information is relevant and wellsummarized. Connections to previous literature and broader issues are generally clear. Goals and hypotheses are stated clearly but may lack conciseness or clarity in relevance.
Superb (5)
Background information is highly relevant and exceptionally summarized. Clear connections to previous literature and broader issues. Goals and hypotheses are clearly and concisely stated with evident relevance.
Clearly deficient (1)
Inappropriate choice of experimental methods with no descriptions of controls or comparative groups.
Less than adequate (2)
Poor choice of experimental methods with unclear descriptions of controls and comparative groups.
Adequate (3)
Adequate choice of experimental methods with descriptions of controls and comparative groups, but lacking in originality or innovation.
More than adequate (4)
Excellent choice of experimental methods with clear descriptions of controls and comparative groups.
Superb (5)
Excellent choice of experimental methods with clear descriptions of controls and comparative groups.
Clearly deficient (1)
Inadequate data presented with unclear or illogical presentation. No identification of potential problems or alternative approaches.
Less than adequate (2)
Limited amounts of data presented with unclear or incomplete presentation. Few potential problems or alternative approaches identified.
Adequate (3)
Adequate amounts of data presented with some clarity, thoroughness, and logical presentation. Limited identification of potential problems or alternative approaches.
More than adequate (4)
Substantial amounts of high-quality data presented with clear, thorough, and logical presentation. Some potential problems and alternative approaches identified.
Superb (5)
Substantial amounts of high-quality data presented with exceptional clarity, thoroughness, and logical presentation. Potential problems and alternative approaches identified.
Clearly deficient (1)
Inconclusive or unsupported conclusions. No clear connection to project goals or hypotheses, with no discussion of relevance in a wider context.
Less than adequate (2)
Weak conclusions lacking strong support from evidence. Limited connection to project goals or hypotheses, with little discussion of relevance in a wider context.
Adequate (3)
Conclusions drawn with some support from evidence. Connection to project goals or hypotheses is somewhat clear, with limited discussion of relevance in a wider context.
More than adequate (4)
Sound conclusions supported with evidence. Connected to project goals or hypotheses, with some discussion of relevance in a wider context.
Superb (5)
Sound conclusions supported with evidence. Connected to project goals or hypotheses, with some discussion of relevance in a wider context.
Clearly deficient (1)
Presentation lacks clarity and logical progression, making it difficult for the audience to follow. Simplicity and flow of information are severely lacking, hindering audience understanding. Text is verbose, contains numerous spelling or typographical errors, significantly detracting from professionalism. Visual elements are poorly executed, detracting from the overall appeal and effectiveness of the presentation. Media usage is ineffective and distracting, failing to enhance audience comprehension.
Less than adequate (2)
Presentation occasionally lacks clarity or logical progression. Elegance in simplicity and flow of information is inconsistent. Some text may be verbose or contain occasional spelling or typographical errors. Visual appeal could be improved, with some elements lacking cohesion or clarity. Media usage occasionally detracts from the presentation's effectiveness due to minor distractions.
Adequate (3)
Presentation is generally clear and logical, with only minor lapses in coherence. Elegance in simplicity and flow of information is evident, though some areas may lack refinement. Text is mostly concise and error-free, with occasional minor errors. Visual elements contribute to the presentation's appeal, but improvements could be made in certain areas. Media usage is generally effective, with only occasional minor distractions.
More than adequate (4)
Presentation is consistently clear, logical, and highly engaging throughout. Elegance in simplicity and flow of information is exceptional, enhancing audience understanding and engagement. Text is concise, error-free, and effectively conveys information with precision. Visual elements are exceptionally appealing, enhancing the overall aesthetics of the presentation. Media usage is highly effective, seamlessly integrated, and enhances audience comprehension without any distractions.
Superb (5)
Presentation excels in clarity, logical progression, and audience engagement. Elegance in simplicity and flow of information is exemplary, captivating the audience's attention and facilitating comprehension. Text is impeccably concise, error-free, and communicates key points with exceptional clarity. Visual elements are stunningly crafted, contributing significantly to the presentation's appeal and effectiveness. Media usage is masterfully executed, perfectly complementing the presentation without any distractions.
Clearly deficient (1)
Figures and tables absent or irrelevant. No explanation provided by the presenter. No balance of visuals and text.
Less than adequate (2)
Figures and tables labeled incorrectly or with inconsistencies. Poor explanation by the presenter. Unbalanced use of visuals and text.
Adequate (3)
Figures and tables labeled correctly, with some enhancement of data understanding. Utilized with minor issues in explanation. Adequate balance of visuals and text.
More than adequate (4)
Figures and tables labeled correctly, enhancing understanding of data. Utilized properly but explained with minor inconsistencies by the presenter. Good balance of visuals and text.
Superb (5)
Figures and tables labeled correctly, enhancing understanding of data. Utilized properly and explained clearly by the presenter. Enhance visual appeal with a good balance of visuals and text.
Clearly deficient (1)
Presenter lacks poise and professionalism, appearing nervous or disorganized. Demonstrates limited knowledge of the subject and related areas, struggling to provide accurate or insightful information. Speech is unclear, unnatural, and lacks enthusiasm, with minimal or no eye contact. Enunciation and voice tone are poor, hindering audience understanding and engagement. Presentation significantly exceeds or falls short of the 12-minute time limit, failing to maintain audience interest throughout.
Less than adequate (2)
Presenter's delivery lacks consistency in poise and professionalism. Knowledge of the subject and related areas is adequate but lacks depth or thoroughness. Speech is somewhat unclear or lacks naturalness, with occasional lapses in enthusiasm or eye contact. Enunciation and voice tone could be improved, occasionally hindering audience understanding or engagement. Presentation may slightly exceed or fall short of the 12-minute time limit, resulting in minor fluctuations in audience interest.
Adequate (3)
Presenter delivers the presentation with poise and professionalism, maintaining audience attention. Demonstrates satisfactory knowledge of the subject and related areas, providing accurate and relevant information. Speech is generally clear, natural, and delivered with enthusiasm, with consistent eye contact. Enunciation and voice tone are adequate, facilitating audience understanding and engagement. Presentation fits within the 12-minute time limit and generally maintains audience interest throughout.
More than adequate (4)
Presenter delivers the presentation with confidence and professionalism, captivating the audience. Demonstrates solid knowledge of the subject and related areas, providing insightful and compelling information. Speech is clear, natural, and delivered with enthusiasm, maintaining consistent eye contact throughout. Enunciation and voice tone are excellent, enhancing audience understanding and engagement. Presentation fits comfortably within the 12minute time limit and effectively maintains audience interest.
Superb (5)
Presenter delivers an outstanding presentation with exceptional poise and professionalism, commanding the audience's attention throughout. Demonstrates exemplary knowledge of the subject and related areas, providing comprehensive and compelling information. Speech is impeccably clear, natural, and delivered with enthusiasm, maintaining strong and engaging eye contact. Enunciation and voice tone are superb, enhancing audience understanding and engagement to the highest degree. Presentation is precisely within the 12-minute time limit and consistently maintains audience interest, leaving a lasting impression.
