BHO2285 – Assessment 4 Rubric - The Complete Academic Support Hub

BHO2285 – Assessment 4 Rubric

Criteria	Full Marks	High Distinction (80-100%)	Distinction (70-79%)	Credit (60-69%)	Pass (50-59%)	Not Satisfactory (0-49%)
Purpose of the presentation	1 points	0.9 points Purpose is stated clearly and encourages respondents to participate.	0.8 points Purpose is stated clearly and pitched at the appropriate level.	0.7 point Purpose is stated somewhat clearly.	0.6 points Purpose is stated vaguely.	0.4 points Purpose is not stated.
Links between research question and data analysis	2 points	1.8 points Demonstrates excellent relationship between data and research question.	1.5 points Demonstrates relationship between data and research questions.	1.3 points Limited demonstration of relationship between data and research questions.	1.1 points Underdeveloped relationship between data and research questions.	0.5 points Connections between data and research questions unclear.
Data visualisation	5 points	4.5 points Demonstrates mastery of data analysis and data visualisation is impressive.	3.8 points Demonstrates proficiency of data analysis and data visualisation is very good.	3.3 points Limited demonstration of data analysis and data visualisation is good.	2.8 points Data analysis is underdeveloped and data visualisation is basic.	2 points Data analysis is inappropriate and data visualisation is non-existent.
Delivery, engagement with audience, and time management	5 points	4.5 points Clear, strong voice with appropriate inflections emphasising key messages. Responds accurately to all questions with relevant explanations and contextualisation / elaboration. Keeps eye contact with audience. No reliance on notes. Efficient management of presentation and audience response time	3.8 points Clear, strong voice (i.e. all audience members hear the presentation) with a variety of inflections. Responds accurately to all questions with relevant explanations. Keeps eye contact with audience. Occasionally glances at notes or slides. Efficient management of presentation time with topics reflecting their relative importance	3.3 points Clear, audible voice (i.e. most audience members hear the presentation), but occasionally monotone. Responds accurately to all questions. Keeps eye contact with audience most of the time. Occasionally reads notes or slides. Manages presentation within time limits.	2.8 points Mostly clear voice, occasionally delivered at a distracting pace (i.e. too slow or too quick) and/or monotone. Responds to most questions with rudimentary answers (not always clearly or completely) and fails to elaborate. Makes intermittent eye contact. Relies on notes or slides most of the time. Uneven presentation to manage time.	2 points Quiet voice or pronunciation often indistinct. Responds to few questions, some incomplete and/or incorrect answers. Rarely makes eye contact with audience; reads notes or slides. Poor time management.
Design of slides	4 points	3.6 points Outstanding use of colour, design, and space. Original and creative design. Overall design is pleasing and harmonious and of professional standard.	3.0 points Good use of colour, design, and space. Overall design is creative, pleasing and harmonious.	2.6 points Adequate use of colour, design, and space. Design is adequate. Overall design is mostly pleasing and harmonious.	2.2 points Inappropriate use of colour, design, and space. Design lacks creativity. Lack of harmonious design in presentation.	1.6 points Insufficient evidence of cohesive team functioning. Infrequent examples of links between members’ contributions including limited evidence of equal contribution between group members.
Teamwork	5 points	4.5 points Functions effectively as a cohesive team with all participants contributing equally to the presentation. Clear links and coordination between members’ contributions.	3.8 points Evidence of cohesive team function with some links between members’ contributions. Evidence of equal contributions of group members.	3.3 points Some evidence of cohesive team function and coordination between group members’ contributions. Some evidence of equal contributions in the group.	2.8 points Limited evidence of cohesive team function and /or coordination between embers’ contributions. Minimal evidence of equal contributions between group members.	2 points Numerous spelling errors. Grammar, punctuation, spacing and word usage have a number of errors.
Quality of the presentation	3 points	2.7 points All words are spelled correctly. Grammar, punctuation, spacing and word usage are appropriate and at a professional business quality.	2.3 points All words are spelled correctly. Grammar, punctuation, spacing and word usage are appropriate.	2 points Most words are spelled correctly. Grammar, punctuation, spacing and word usage are mostly appropriate.	1.7 points Most words are spelled correctly. Grammar, punctuation, spacing and word usage have some errors.	1.2 point Numerous spelling errors. Grammar, punctuation, spacing and word usage have a number of errors.