iRubric: Argumentative Presentation rubric

Excellent attention-grabber, related to audience, credibility established, gave very brief introduction of topic, and stated claim, (i.e. point you'll be trying to prove )previewed the main points. Clearly stated the relevance of topic to audience needs and interests

The speaker introduced the speech adequately, including a hook and a preview of the main points of the speech. Claim was somewhat clearly expressed. Relevance of topic to audience needs and interests was somewhat apparent. 6 - 8 points

The speaker introduced the speech, but some details were unclear. The introduction lacked an attention getter and/or a preview of main points. 3-5 points

The speaker failed to introduce the speech OR the introduction was not useful in indicating what the speech was about. 0 - 2 points

Presents sound arguments to support thesis. Arguments are supported with sufficient, relevant, and valid evidence. Addressed counter-arguments in a fair and persuasive manner.

Some arguments are sufficiently supported but some unsupported. Minor reasoning present. Oppositional argument somewhat addressed. Most sources are credible and cited aloud.

Arguments lack some relevant and solid evidence. Credibility of sources and/or information is questionable. Oppositional arguments not present or not very apparent. Less than two sources are credible and/or cited aloud.

Arguments lack relevant and valid evidence. Information is incorrect and/or outdated. Sources either aren't credible or not cited in presentation.

Speaker used original and effective creative techniques.

Speaker used typical techniques to keep the attention of audience, but nothing original.

Creativity was minimal.

The element of creativity was overpowering and distracting from the true message or creativity was not included.

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.

Some limited variation of vocal characteristics. Use of pace, pitch, power and pauses seemed inconsistent at times. Some verbal fillers.

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.

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.

Speaker effectively addresses questions from the audience. It is apparent that the speaker prepared for possible counterclaims and questions ahead of time.

Speaker gets slightly uncomfortable with questions from audience or cannot easily formulate an answer.

Very uncomfortable with questions from audience.

Cannot answer questions from audience.