|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody in the group was prepared. The speech in general was not very structured, not prepared at all.
|
Shows some attempt at last-minute preparation by the team.
|
Most of the team seemed prepared, while others seem very lacking.
|
The entire team appeared to be very prepared. The speech was structured clearly and each team member knew exactly what he was speaking about.
|
|
|
Nobody in the team was not able to defend issue. Did not seem educated enough on the issue to defend it.
|
Some of the team could only defend the issue on certain points.
|
Most of the team was very well-informed on the topic and was able to defend many of the points raised, but several members could not defend the points.
|
All of the team was well-informed on the topic and was able to defend all of the points raised.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
All counter-arguments were accurate, relevant and strong.
|
Most counter-arguments were accurate, relevant, and strong.
|
Most counter-arguments were accurate and relevant, but several were weak.
|
Counter-arguments were not accurate and/or relevant
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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 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).
|
|
|
The team clearly understood the topic in-depth and presented their information forcefully and convincingly.
|
The team clearly undestood the topic in-depth and presented their information with ease.
|
The team seemed to understand the main points of the topic and presented those with ease.
|
The team did not show an adequate understanding of the topic.
|
