Oral Presentation Evaluation - Teams

  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.
  • : Function ereg() is deprecated in /Library/Server/Web/Data/Sites/isucomm/includes/file.inc on line 646.

Team Evaluation Form

For more information on this Point System Grading, read a summary of pros and cons of this method.

Team Members _______________________________________________________

Start Time: _______
Stop Time: _______

Organization

_____(2) 1. Did team effectively introduce the problem?
_____(1) 2. Did they state the purpose of the presentation?
_____(1) 3. Was there an effective transition from one speaker to the next?
_____(2) 4. Was there a good summary/conclusion?
_____(2) 5. Did the team demonstrate that they were well prepared?
_____(2) 6. Did they stay within the time constraint?

_____x2 = _____ Score:

Delivery

_____(2) 1. Did each member have a significant speaking part?
_____(2) 2. Were the deliveries smooth and rehearsed?
_____(2) 3. Could the deliveries be heard throughout the audience?
_____(2) 4. Was the level of terminology used appropriate for the audience?
_____(2) 5. Did speakers demonstrate enthusiasm in their presentation?

_____x2 = _____ Score:

Visual Aids

_____(2) 1. Did each speaker integrate visual aids into the presentation?
_____(2) 2. Were the visuals supportive of the purpose of the presentation?
_____(2) 3. Were they of good quality?
_____(2) 4. Were they easy for the audience to follow?
_____(2) 5. Were there sufficient visuals to support the presentation content?

_____x2 = _____ Score:

Addressing Key Issues

_____(4) 1. Could the audience clearly understand the criteria and constraints applied to the solution?
_____(3) 2. Did the team describe how well the design functioned under different conditions?
_____(3) 3. Did the team develop a logical and systematic justification of the proposed design improvements?
_____(4) 4. Was an effective “selling” job performed on the potential uses for the design?

_____x2 = _____ Score:

Response to Questions

_____(12) 1. Did the team handle questions intelligently and professionally?

_____x2 = _____ Score:

Team Score _______

Submitted by Amy R. Slagell, Director of the Fundamentals of Public Speaking Program:
for ISUComm Instructor Workshop, August 17, 2004

DOC  PDF