Pass Enough structure, breadth and depth of material to reach a minimum acceptable standard. (40) Fail Marred by poor structure, lack of Little evidence of understanding or Style, grammar and spelling are poor. Diagrams relevance, serious omissions and/or integration of concepts. and tables are missing or irrelevant. Inaccurate many factual errors. Where appropriate, and/or incomplete bibliography. (20 39) poor use of literature. – Deficient in structure, to address the No evidence of understanding or Language, grammar and spelling are dreadful. question/title, numerous omissions and integration of concepts. Diagrams and tables are missing or irrelevant. Bad fail errors. No evidence of serious reading Bibliography is grossly inaccurate and/or and profound ignorance of the subject. incomplete. (0 - 19) QUALITATIVE CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT OF ORAL PRESENTATIONS MARK COVERAGE AND ANALYSIS SUPPORT VOICE AUDIENCE Supporting RELEVANCE DELIVERY ENGAGEMENT Media/AVA Clear evidence of 80 Excellent on topic. Excellent understanding and Excellent and Clear and maintained Excellent use of – extensive extra 100 Excellent understanding of explanation of concepts. Critical confident use of audience engagement, supporting material. reading. concepts. Excellent analysis of information in voice. Excellent breadth and integration of
Pass (40) Enough structure, breadth and depth of material to reach a minimum acceptable standard. Fail (20 – 39) Marred by poor structure, lack of relevance, serious omissions and/or many factual errors. Where appropriate, poor use of literature. Little evidence of understanding or integration of concepts. Style, grammar and spelling are poor. Diagrams and tables are missing or irrelevant. Inaccurate and/or incomplete bibliography. Bad fail (0 - 19) Deficient in structure, to address the question/title, numerous omissions and errors. No evidence of serious reading and profound ignorance of the subject. No evidence of understanding or integration of concepts. Language, grammar and spelling are dreadful. Diagrams and tables are missing or irrelevant. Bibliography is grossly inaccurate and/or incomplete. QUALITATIVE CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT OF ORAL PRESENTATIONS MARK COVERAGE AND RELEVANCE ANALYSIS SUPPORT VOICE DELIVERY AUDIENCE ENGAGEMENT Supporting Media/AVA 80 – 100 Excellent on topic. Excellent understanding of concepts. Excellent breadth and integration of Excellent understanding and explanation of concepts. Critical analysis of information in Clear evidence of extensive extra reading. Excellent Excellent and confident use of voice. Clear and maintained audience engagement, Excellent use of supporting material.
Copa-FSN2014-15.docx