Five Approaches to Oral Evaluations
Effects Criterion
Did the presentation accomplish its goal? Did it sell the product/plan? Can the audience successfully answer questions about the material presented?
Pros:
- students may agree that it is like real life
- can be combined with other approaches
Cons:
- may require outside judges
- will require time to evaluate the effect
- it is a threatening situation that increases student anxiety and may interfere with learning
- involves complicated ethical issues
Point System
Lists expectations/criteria for grading and awards points for each.
(Example: Oral Presentation Evaluation – Teams)
Pros:
- once critique form is developed it is simple to implement
- allows for a quick grading response
- form can be distributed early to allow for a clear discussion of expectations
- students appreciate the use of numbers
- students can see where they “lost” points
- with training or elaboration into a fuller rubric can provide consistency among graders across sections
Cons:
- feedback is often limited
- it attempts to divide delivery from content
- it offers a false sense of “objectivity” and suggests that effective speaking is a checklist of universal and distinct specific behaviors
- can produce very low scores
Modified Point System
Lists expectations/criteria for grading in categories and then awards points for each.
(Example: Oral Presentation Evaluation - Small Groups and Speech Evaluation Criteria)
Pros:
- form can be distributed early to allow for a clear discussion of expectations
- students appreciate the use of numbers
- allows for flexibility in feedback that can integrate delivery issues into each part of the assessment
- can be developed into a complete rubric that creates a strong grading consistency
Cons:
- can make it hard for students to know what “cost” them points in each category
- can create a false sense of “objectivity”
- can produce low scores
- full rubric can overwhelm
- can produce cookie cutter speeches
Holistic Approach
Lists expectations/criteria for grading in categories according to general letter grade performance and then provides feedback for each particular criterion of an assignment.
(Example: Holistic Grading Overview for Oral Presentations and an Informative Speech Feedback Form)
Pros:
- maximizes feedback and focus on student development
- adaptable to a wide range of assignments
- emphasizes the impact of the presentation as a whole, while providing feedback on specific issues
Cons:
- time consuming approach to grading; appears less “objective”
- requires confidence on the part of the graders
- students may have a hard time understanding the grade
Peer and/or Self-Critique
Offers forms for peers to fill out for one another or for speakers to fill out after viewing a videotape.
(Examples: Oral Presentation Evaluation - Peer Critique and Peer Evaluation of Oral Presentations)
Pros:
- spreads the work around
- increases sense of audience as going beyond the instructor
- self-reflection offers a great pedagogical tool
- encourages students to set personal communication skills goals and work toward them
Cons:
- it is complicated to convert such evaluations into letter grades
- some peers are poor listeners or rude respondents
- there are time and administrative challenges
- videotaping can heighten anxiety
Submitted by Amy R. Slagell, Director of the Fundamentals of Public Speaking Program:
for ISUComm Instructor Workshop, August 17, 2004