Skip to main content

- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Campiagn Speech rubric

iRubric: Campiagn Speech rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Campiagn Speech COMM 110: Persuasion Speech Candidates will give a five-minute campaign speech that may incorporate portions of their PowerPoints or videos. Rubric Code: A6BX32 By aakennedy Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Communication Type: Presentation Grade Levels: 9-12

Campaign Speech Grading
	Needs Improvement (N/A)	Fair (N/A)	Good (N/A)	Excellent (N/A)
Content/Organization
Introduction	Needs Improvement The candidate failed to introduce the speech OR the introduction was not useful in indicating what the speech was about.	Fair The candidate introduced the speech, but some details were unclear. The introduction lacked an attention getter and/or a preview of main points.	Good The candidate introduced the speech adequately, including an attention getter and a preview of the main points of the speech. Claim wasn't clearly expressed. Relevance of topic to audience needs and interests was somewhat apparent.	Excellent ATTENTION STEP: Excellent attention-getter. Candidate related to audience, credibility established, gavee very brief introduction, and stated claim, (i.e. main idea)previewed the main points. Clearly stated the relevance of topic to audience needs and interests.
Body	Needs Improvement The speech was difficult to follow due to a lack of organization. Little detail was given to support the main points. Difficult to identify introduction, body, and conclusion.	Fair Organization was lacking and details were missing to the extent that some persuasive impact was compromised. Transitions need work.	Good Good general organization but some steps weren't clear or well-developed. Transitions were okay, but not as unique or distinct as they could be.	Excellent Main points work within the steps and are clearly distinguished with supporting details. Transitions are effectively used for coherent movement from point to point.
PATHOS (emotional appeal)	Needs Improvement Fails to appropriately appeal to audience emotions. No attempt to use vivid or descriptive language to capture audience emotions. Fallacies used instead of ethical appeals. No obvious use of rhetorical devices.	Fair Minimal appeal to audience emotions (anger, fear, status, compassion, etc.) for persuasive goal; fails to observe ethical responsibilities. Creates some effective imagery through language. At least one rhetorical device was used.	Good Appeals to audience emotions (anger, fear, compassion, status, etc.) to achieve the persuasive goal, but fails to use enough pathos to really move audience, didn't completely observe ethical responsibilities. Creates some effective imagery through language. At least two rhetorical devices were used.	Excellent Effectively and ethically appeals to audience emotions (anger, status, power, fear, compassion, etc.) to achieve the persuasive goal. Vivid and emotive language effectively used to create imagery to engage audience emotionally. At least three rhetorical devices were used.
LOGOS (logical appeal)	Needs Improvement Arguments lack relevant and valid evidence. Information is incorrect and/or outdated. Many fallacies are present in the reasoning. Sources either aren't credible or not cited in presentation.	Fair Arguments lack some relevant and solid evidence. Credibility of sources and/or information is questionable. Many fallacies are present in the reasoning. Oppositional arguments not present or not very apparent. Less than two sources are credible and/or cited aloud.	Good Some arguments are sufficiently supported but some unsupported assertions are also present. Minor reasoning present. Oppositional argument somewhat addressed. Most sources are credible and cited aloud.	Excellent Presents sound arguments to support major claim. Arguments are supported with sufficient, relevant and valid evidence. Reasoning is free of fallacies.Addressed oppositional arguments in a fair and persuasive manner. All four sources are cited aloud and are credible.
Conclusion	Needs Improvement No brakelight, conclusion ended rather abruptly. Most parts of conclusion were missing.	Fair Brakelight was weak or not present; the speaker concluded the speech in a disorganized fashion. Two or more important components were not present.	Good Brakelight alerted audience to the presentation conclusion.The speaker recaped main points but missed at least one key component of conclusion (call to action, clincher, tie-back to intro...etc.)	Excellent Brakelight alerted audience to the presentation conclusion. The speaker summarized the main points, tied back to the introduction to bring the speech full circle, and left the audience with a specific call to action and a powerful clincher
Delivery
Voice	Needs Improvement Audience had difficulty hearing and/or understanding much of the speech due to monotone or inappropriate variation of vocal characteristics. Inconsistent with verbal message. Excessive fluency errors interfered with message comprehension. Excessive use of vocalized fillers.	Fair The student could be heard most of the time but at certain points were inaudible and/or inarticulate. Little pitch variation. Pacing was too slow/fast. Verbal fillers were noticable and frequent.	Good Some limited variation of vocal characteristics. Use of pace, pitch, power and pauses seemed inconsistent at times. Some verbal fillers.	Excellent Natural variation of vocal characteristics (pace, pitch, power, pauses, articulation) in Standard English to heighten interest and match message appropriately. Few, if any, verbal fillers.
Eye Contact	Needs Improvement The speaker seldom looked at the audience. Reads speech from notes. Avoided eye contact with audience. Only occasional and sporadic glances.	Fair Conspicuous use of speaker notes. Seems disengaged from audience for noticeable periods of time.	Good The speaker looked up occasionally and focused on just a few people during the speech. Some use of speaker notes. Seemed a bit disengaged from audience for short periods of time.	Excellent Consistently and effectively used eye contact to establish rapport with audience. Inconspicuous use of speaker notes and effective use of scanning to established an expanded zone of interaction.
Body/Appearance	Needs Improvement Candidate's appearance had no link to the character. The speaker's posture and expression indicated a lack of enthusiasm or comfortableness with the speech. Some gestures were distracting.	Fair Candidate's appearance had littel connection to character. Facial expressions seemed forced or absent. Stiff or unnatural use of nonverbal behaviors. Limited use of gestures to reinforce verbal message.	Good Candidate's appearance related to the character. Facial expressions were comfortable. Gestures were fine--though were limited. Increase use of gestures to reinforce verbal message.	Excellent Candidate's appearance was an accurate and creative portrayal of the character. Expressive, dynamic, and natural use of gestures, posture and facial expressions to reinforce and enhance meaning.
Visuals/Props	Needs Improvement No visual used.	Fair Visuals only slightly helped in understanding some of message. PPT had too many words per slide and/or had several typos. Videos, if used, may have exceeded 1 minute of total speech time.	Good Visuals helped in understanding some of message. PPT, if used, was easy to see and contained few errors. Videos, if used, may have slightly exceeded 1 minute of total speech time.	Excellent Visual served as an aid to help us understand the importance of something logical and meaningful. If PPT was used, it was error-free and easy to see. Videos didn't exceed 1 minute of total speech time.
Timing	Needs Improvement 1:00-3:00 over required time.	Fair 31-1:00 over required time	Good 15-30 seconds over required time	Excellent kept within required time frame
Written Preparation Work
	Work in Progress 2.5 pts	Fair 5 pts	Good 7.5 pts	Excellent 10 pts
Outline	Work in Progress Complete lack of clarity with: Title, Specific Purpose, Central Idea, Introduction, Body, Conclusion, Transitions. Inconsistent symbols & indentation.Main points, Subpoints not in full sentences. No sources cited.	Fair Rarely/inconsistently had clear and properly labeled Title, Specific Was infrequently clear with Purpose, Central Idea, Introduction, Body, Conclusion, Transitions. Rarely had Main points, Subpoints in full sentences.Few or no sources cited.	Good Most of the time, clear and properly labeled Title, Specific Purpose, Central Idea, Introduction, Body, Conclusion, Transitions. Mostly used consistent symbols & indentation. Most Main points, Subpoints in full sentences. Most sources cited.	Excellent Consistent with clearly and properly labeled Title, Specific Purpose, Central Idea, Introduction, Body, Conclusion, Transitions. Consistent symbols & indentation.Main points, Subpoints in full sentences. All Sources cited.
Audience Analysis	Work in Progress Analysis is not typed and is lacking any substantial analysis and specificity. No customizations and adaptations for this audience were made. Maslow was not used to consider how content would meet audience needs.	Fair Analysis is not typed and is less than adequate in terms of analysis and specificity. Minor, if any, customizations and adaptations for this audience. Maslow was not used to consider how content would meet audience needs.	Good Analysis is typed and adequate. Some thought went into each part of the analysis and student provided customizations and adaptations for this audience. Maslow was used to consider how content would meet audience needs	Excellent Analysis is typed and thorough. Careful thought went into each part of the analysis and provided specific customizations and adaptations for this audience. Maslow was used to consider how content would meet audience needs.
Works Cited	Work in Progress No Works Cited sheet or Works Cited has mininal sources listed; not in alphabetical order, Not formated using the APA guidelines.	Fair Four or less questionably credible sources. Not listed in alphabetical order and/or not formated using the APA guidelines.	Good Four credible sources listed not in alphabetical order and/ formated using the APA guidelines.	Excellent Four credible sources listed in alphabetical order, formated using the APA guidelines.

Keywords:

persuasion, speech, presentation

Subjects:

Types:

Presentation

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More Communication rubrics

More Presentation rubrics

Do more with this rubric:

Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.

Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.

Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.

Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.

Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.

Assess

Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.

Share

Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.

Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubric^tm.

Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

n232