iRubric: Public Speaking Podcast rubric

Demonstrates a full understanding of the selected subject. Information in the podcast is interesting and instructional. Logical steps can be seen.

Demonstrates a good understanding of the selected subject. Information in the podcast is interesting and instructional. Some logical steps can be seen.

Demonstrates a little understanding of the selected subject. Information in the podcast is instructional. A few logical steps can be seen.

Does not show understanding of the selected subject. No instruction can be taken from the video.

Interesting, well-rehearsed, compelling delivery, grammatically correct, paced well. Narration is expressive, clear and well-paced. Target audience clearly addressed.

Relatively interesting, rehearsed, good grammar.

Choppy delivery, errors in grammar, contents not very compelling.

Delivery needs improvement. Grammar needs improvement. Content not compelling.

Video did not rock/shake and the focus was excellent. Many different camera angles and/or use of zoom provided variety to video. No errors in grammar or spelling on visuals.

Video occasionally had slight movement, but the focus was excellent throughout. Some variation in camera angles and/or careful use of zoom provided variety in the video. May have 1-2 errors in spelling or grammar on visuals.

Video was unstable or the focus was poor throughout. Few different caera angles or use of zoom to provide variety in the vadeo. Had a sameness to it. Spellcheck should have been used on visuals.

Quality unacceptable.

Entire video podcast shows exceptional creativity and originality.

Video podcast shows some creativity and originality.

Video podcast is generally well organized, but shows little creativity or originality.

Video podcast shows little thought and lacks creativity or originality.

The group documents how members brainstormed, discussed, and solved problems. The group documents division of responsibilities and describes how the individual efforts capitalized on strengths of each team member.

The group documents how members divided tasks, assigned roles based on the skills/talents of individual members, shared the workload and managed problems in a way that advanced the group goal.

Some individuals document how there was poor communication, unresolved conflict, or failure to collaborate on important aspects of the work.

Few people contributed their fair share of work, or the project was created by one student doing most of the work (though may have received guidance or help from others).