|
|
|
|
|
|
All information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough.
|
Most information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough.
|
Most information presented in the debate was clear and accurate, but was not usually thorough.
|
Information had several inaccuracies OR was usually not clear.
|
|
Every major point was well supported with several relevant facts, statistics and/or examples.
|
Every major point was adequately supported with relevant facts, statistics and/or examples.
|
Every major point was supported with facts, statistics and/or examples, but the relevance of some was questionable.
|
Every point was not supported.
|
|
All arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion.
|
Most arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion.
|
All arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) but the organization was sometimes not clear or logical.
|
Arguments were not clearly tied to an idea (premise).
|
|
Team consistently used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience.
|
Team usually used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience.
|
Team sometimes used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience.
|
One or more members of the team had a presentation style that did not keep the attention of the audience.
|
|
All statements, body language, and responses were respectful and were in appropriate language.
|
Statements and responses were respectful and used appropriate language, but once or twice body language was not.
|
Most statements and responses were respectful and in appropriate language, but there was one sarcastic remark.
|
Statements, responses and/or body language were consistently not respectful.
|