Skip to main content
sign in
Username
Password
forgot?
Sign up
Share
help_outline
help
Pricing
Request Info
Please enable JavaScript on your web browser
menu
iRubric: Jour 498 Debate Team Rubric
find rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Jour 498 Debate Team Rubric
Rubric Code:
MX3A777
By
SBluestein
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject:
Journalism
Type:
Presentation
Grade Levels:
Undergraduate
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
Jour 498 Debate Team Rubric
Superior
20 pts
Proficient
16 pts
Poor
12 pts
Unsatisfactory
8 pts
Comprehension
Superior
The team clearly
understood the topic in-
depth and presented their
information forcefully and convincingly.
Proficient
The team clearly
understood the topic in-
depth and presented their
information with ease.
Poor
The team seemed to understand the main points of the topic and presented those with ease.
Unsatisfactory
The team seemed
to understand the
main points of the
topic, but didn’t
present with ease.
Use of Factual Information
Superior
All information presented
in this debate was clear,
accurate and thorough.
Proficient
Most information presented in this debate
was clear, accurate and thorough.
Poor
Most information
presented in the debate
was clear and accurate, but was not usually thorough.
Unsatisfactory
Information had
some major
inaccuracies OR
was usually not clear.
SPJ Code & Ethical Principles
Superior
Team used at least 4 references to SPJ Code of Ethics and/or ethical principles.
Proficient
Team used at least 3 references to SPJ Code of Ethics and/or ethical principles.
Poor
Team used at least 2 references to SPJ Code of Ethics and/or ethical principles.
Unsatisfactory
Team used one or no references to SPJ Code of Ethics and/or ethical principles.
Organization
Superior
All arguments were
clearly tied to an idea
(premise) and organized in
a tight, logical fashion.
Proficient
Most arguments were
clearly tied to an idea
(premise) and organized in
a tight, logical fashion.
Poor
All arguments were
clearly tied to an idea
(premise) but the
organization was
sometimes not clear or logical.
Unsatisfactory
Arguments were
not tied well to an idea.
Delivery/Presentation Style
Superior
Team consistently used
gestures, eye contact, tone
of voice and a level of
enthusiasm in a way that
kept the attention of the audience.
Proficient
Team usually used
gestures, eye contact, tone
of voice and a level of
enthusiasm in a way that
kept the attention of the audience.
Poor
Team sometimes used
gestures, eye contact, tone
of voice and a level of
enthusiasm in a way that
kept the attention of the
audience.
Unsatisfactory
One or more
members of the
team had a
presentation style
that did not keep attention.
Rebuttal
Superior
All counter-arguments
were accurate, relevant
and strong.
Proficient
Most counter-arguments
were accurate, relevant and strong.
Poor
Most counter-arguments
were accurate and
relevant, but several were weak.
Unsatisfactory
Counter-arguments
were not accurate and/or relevant.
Persuasiveness
Superior
All arguments were logical and convincing.
Proficient
Most arguments were logical and convincing.
Poor
Some arguments were logical and convincing.
Unsatisfactory
Few arguments were logical and convincing.
Subjects:
Journalism
Types:
Presentation
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More Journalism rubrics
More Presentation rubrics
Do more with this rubric:
Preview
Preview this rubric.
Edit
Modify this rubric.
Copy
Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.
Print
Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize
Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark
Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run
Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade
Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate
Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish
Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email
Email this rubric to a friend.
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.
n178
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.