Skip to Main Content

Judging Rubric

Student Symposium - Judging Rubrics

Round 1:

Official Student Symposium judges should use the rubric below to evaluate videos. Friends, family and other viewers participating in "Fan Favorite" voting are encouraged to use the rubric as a guide while submitting "likes."

Criteria4 points3 points2 points1 point
Purpose
Considerations: Clear statement of main idea; selection of key points suitable for the 3-minute video presentation format.
The purpose was:Very clear and compellingClearPartially clearNot sufficiently clear
Context
Considerations: Appropriate and necessary background to provide an overview of the research/project and its relevance; articulates the significance of the research/project to broader academic and professional goals.
The context was:Well-developed and explicitClear but sometimes implicitNot entirely clearUnclear
Audience
Considerations: Uses terms familiar to a general audience (avoids jargon); appeals to the audience's curiosity; chooses details that bring the research/project to life for the audience.
The audience's needs were:Anticipated; I was easily able to engageMet; I was easily able to understandConsidered but not fully metNot taken into account
Speaking Performance
Considerations: Pace and volume is appropriate, audio is clear and timed with the visual presentation. Presenter is poised and the presentation is polished.
The speaking performance:Enhanced the contentDid not distract from the contentAt times distracted from the contentUndermined the content
Video Content & Design
Considerations: Presentation of content is clear, organized and has an appropriate amount of information that highlights key points. Video has smooth transitions and retains audience interest.
The video and content design:Enhanced the presentationDid not distract the presentationSomewhat distracted the presentationUndermined the presentation

Round 2:

Criteria4 points3 points2 points1 point
Purpose
Considerations: Clear statement of main idea; includes key points that clearly and concisely describe the project
The purpose was:Clear and compellingAdequately clearPartially clearNot sufficiently clear
Accessibility of Language
Considerations: Uses terms familiar to a general audience (avoids jargon) and defines terms without prodding if necessary
The presenter used:Little or no jargon and defined terms without proddingJargon frequently but defined terms without proddingJargon without explanation, but could define terms when askedJargon throughout and/or could not explain terms when asked
Speaking Performance
Considerations: Presenter is poised and professional; pace and volume were appropriate
The presenter was:Exceptionally poised and professional and used appropriate pace and volume when answering questionsPoised and professional and used appropriate pace and volume when answering questionsSufficiently poised and professional but could not hear and understand answers to questionsNot sufficiently poised and professional and could not hear or understand answers to questions
Articulation of Relevance and Importance
Considerations: Presenter was able to articulate the impact of their project.
The presenter:Clearly articulated importance by referring to a specific theory or problemArticulated importance in a general senseSeemed unsure about the importance of their projectDid not articulate importance
Ability to Answer Questions
Considerations: Presenter was able to answer questions appropriately, clearly and concisely.
The presenter:Answered all questions appropriately, clearly and concisely
Answered most questions appropriately, clearly and conciselyAnswered some questions appropriately, clearly and conciselyAnswered few questions appropriately, clearly and concisely