0% found this document useful (0 votes)
432 views2 pages

Title Defense - Rubric

This document outlines criteria for evaluating oral presentations for group defense of a title. It includes four dimensions that will be rated on a scale of 1 to 4: Chapter 1-Background of the Study, Chapter 2- Methodology, PowerPoint Presentation, and Presenter. Each dimension includes specific criteria that must be addressed at different performance levels. Two group presenters are listed at the bottom, along with space for comments and the evaluator's signature. The purpose is to evaluate oral title defense presentations based on inclusion of necessary background, methodology, presentation structure, and presentation skills.

Uploaded by

kaykay Cope
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
432 views2 pages

Title Defense - Rubric

This document outlines criteria for evaluating oral presentations for group defense of a title. It includes four dimensions that will be rated on a scale of 1 to 4: Chapter 1-Background of the Study, Chapter 2- Methodology, PowerPoint Presentation, and Presenter. Each dimension includes specific criteria that must be addressed at different performance levels. Two group presenters are listed at the bottom, along with space for comments and the evaluator's signature. The purpose is to evaluate oral title defense presentations based on inclusion of necessary background, methodology, presentation structure, and presentation skills.

Uploaded by

kaykay Cope
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

TITLE DEFENSE

ORAL PRESENTATION FOR GROUP _____

LEVEL OF PERFORMANCES
DIMENSIONS/ CRITERIA/ 4 3 2 1 RATING
INDICATORS/ WEIGHT EXCELLENT VERY SATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY POOR
A. CHAPTER 1- BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
 States what the literature say about the ALL entries in the scoring
research problem or topic rubric are present
 Discusses the relevance of the 1 of the entries in the scoring
research problem or topic rubric is NOT present
 Establishes to whom is the research or 2-4 of the entries in the scoring
topic relevant rubric are NOT present
 Convinces the panel of the necessity 4-5 of the entries in the
to conduct the study scoring rubric are NOT
present
B. CHAPTER 2- METHODOLOGY
 Identifies the research design ALL entries in the scoring
 Identifies the research instrument rubric are present
 Identifies the respondents/ subject of 1 of the entries in the scoring
the study rubric is NOT present
 Identifies sampling procedure 2-4 of the entries in the scoring
 Identifies statistical procedure or data rubric are NOT present
instrument procedure 4-5 of the entries in the
scoring rubric are NOT
present
C. POWER POINT PRESENTATION
 Limited to 15 slides only ALL entries in the scoring
 Limited to 15 minutes per group rubric are present
presentation 1 of the entries in the scoring
 Free from over- used animation and rubric is NOT present
effects 2-4 of the entries in the scoring
 Each slides contains TEN LINES OR rubric are NOT present
LESS 4-5 of the entries in the
 The font size for the title is 40 and for scoring rubric are NOT
the content is 32 present
D. PRESENTER
 Attracts and sustains the attention of ALL entries in the scoring 1 of the entries in the scoring 2-4 of the entries in the scoring 4-5 of the entries in the
the panel rubric are present rubric is NOT present rubric are NOT present scoring rubric are NOT
 Answers the questions in logical and present
empirical manner
 Explains the proposal clearly and
simply
 Free from mannerism that tend
overpower the presentation
 Free from grammatical lapses

Presenter 1: __________________________

Presenter 2: __________________________

FINAL GRADE

COMMENTS:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________

EVALUATOR’S SIGNATURE OVER PRINTED NAME

adopted: RCM;ICMB,2016

You might also like