The MGS Blog

Monday, November 3, 2014

Presentation peer-assessment criteria...

Consider the following criteria in terms of peer-assessing the presentation.

Criteria 1: Motivation

0 = Unclear what drove this research or why it may be important.
1 = Motivation: You can clearly identify 'why' they studied this particular problem and 'why' it may be important.
2 = Clear motivation, plus they clearly identified the problems(s) by initial analysis and/or presented extant knowledge, current hypotheses, and identified gaps in knowledge.

Critera 2: Data

0 = Unclear what research data was gathered or why what was done is relevant.
1 = Data through discovery: They have shown that they have independently researched the problem area(s)
2 = Discovery is evident AND the research data gathered convincingly addresses the problem area, that is, the kind of data gathered is likely to yield insights that may address the problem area.

Criteria 3: Analysis

0 = Unclear how findings or recommendations were arrived at.
1 = Findings are analysed cogently and convincingly; convincing arguments for arriving at findings.
2 = Findings AND responses developed in context of prior knowledge. Synthesis built on findings – clearly addresses the problem(s) and integrates learning from others.

Criteria 4: Engagement/Impact

0 = Very difficult to comprehend, understand, read, hear, etc. I would not watch this presentation again.
1 = A competent presentation, well organised with suitable and meaningful appropriate content.
2 = A really excellent and convincing presentation that conveys clear messages, for example effectively using images, dialogue, humour, shock etc. I would watch it again and encourage others to watch it.

Alternative presentation assessment rubric 

Threshold requirement: Originality and own work; Others' ideas graphics and quotes properly cited, acknowledged and referenced (No Plagarism!).
Equal weighting applied to the following:

  1. Argument demonstrates analytical skills. I was convinced by the evidence and the argument.
  2. Message and conclusions give evidence of reflective thinking and deep engagement with an advanced research topic. I received a clear convincing take-away message.
  3. Overall impression: Is piece competent and polished? Has producer showcased their domain knowledge and professionalism.