Assessment Criteria for the Presentation

Content of Excellent 70+ All relevant theories or theoretical models have been clearly defined, incorporated, thoroughly
Presentation/ explained, and appropriately applied or illustrated with suitable current examples. There is clear
Evidence of evidence that all required research has been undertaken, and is verbally acknowledged in the
Critical thinking presentation.
(30%) Very good 60-69 Relevant theory has been reasonably well explained with some suitable examples clearly
explained. There is clear evidence that a fair range of appropriate research has been undertaken
and is verbally acknowledged in the presentation.
Good 50-59 Some relevant theory has been reasonably well explained with a few examples clearly explained.
There is clear evidence that a fair range of appropriate research has been undertaken some of
which is verbally acknowledged in the presentation.
Competent 35-49 Theories are not fully explained and few or no examples presented. There is evidence of some
limited reading and research, with only some of this verbally acknowledged.
Limited/ Below Only little and very basic explanation of theory with no examples or application given with very
Unacceptable 35 little or no evidence of reading and research, and with very little or no verbal acknowledgement.
No understanding of theory is offered. No evidence of reading or research is offered or apparent.
Effective Excellent 70+ Full command of the language, speaks easily and confidently; very clear presentation, excellent
communication, use of visuals, eye contact, volume, speed, body language and use of notes.
fluency and Very good 60-69 Only occasional lapses in fluency; generally clear with good use of the above.
interactive
communication Good 50-59 Some hesitation but causes the listener only few difficulties; easy to follow but may have
(25%) problems with one or two of the above.
Competent 35-49 Quite a lot of hesitation but generally conveys the message; competent communication but
problems with visuals, eye contact, etc.
Limited/ Below Fluency is compromised due to pauses and hesitations that cause considerable difficulty for the
Unacceptable 35 listener; many serious problems with eye contact/ body language/ speed of delivery/ visuals.
Organisation/ Excellent 70+ Very well organised; relevant information, excellent use of cohesive devices, excellent timing and
Time management/ pacing
Signposting Very good 60-69 Generally well-organised, with a few omissions in one or two of the above
(25%)
Good 50-59 Good organisation, but quite a few omissions in one or two of the above or small mistakes in all

Competent 35-49 Acceptable but basic organisation; several problems with cohesion; problems with timing and
pacing.
Limited/ Below Poor organisation, minimal use of cohesive devices, very poor time management
Unacceptable 35
Lack of organisation and cohesive devices
Slide Design (20%) Excellent 70+ No problems with layout, word density and details contained on each page.

Very good 60-69 Very good with layout, word density, and details contained on each page.
Good 50-59 Generally good with layout, word density and details contained on each page.

Competent 35-49 Slides are clear but cause the audience some difficulty in following the presentation.

Limited/ Below Slides are unclear, cluttered, and poorly designed, not contributing to the presentation.
Unacceptable 35

IMPORTANT: REFER TO THE MARKING CRITERIA IN YOUR STUDENT HANDBOOK

FOR GRADING GUIDELINES

Quality Assurance Record

Internal Approval: External Approval:

Page 1 of 1