oral presentation self evaluation rubric

Rubric Best Practices, Examples, and Templates

A rubric is a scoring tool that identifies the different criteria relevant to an assignment, assessment, or learning outcome and states the possible levels of achievement in a specific, clear, and objective way. Use rubrics to assess project-based student work including essays, group projects, creative endeavors, and oral presentations.

Rubrics can help instructors communicate expectations to students and assess student work fairly, consistently and efficiently. Rubrics can provide students with informative feedback on their strengths and weaknesses so that they can reflect on their performance and work on areas that need improvement.

How to Get Started

Best practices, moodle how-to guides.

• Workshop Recording (Spring 2024)
• Workshop Registration

Step 1: Analyze the assignment

The first step in the rubric creation process is to analyze the assignment or assessment for which you are creating a rubric. To do this, consider the following questions:

• What is the purpose of the assignment and your feedback? What do you want students to demonstrate through the completion of this assignment (i.e. what are the learning objectives measured by it)? Is it a summative assessment, or will students use the feedback to create an improved product?
• Does the assignment break down into different or smaller tasks? Are these tasks equally important as the main assignment?
• What would an “excellent” assignment look like? An “acceptable” assignment? One that still needs major work?
• How detailed do you want the feedback you give students to be? Do you want/need to give them a grade?

Step 2: Decide what kind of rubric you will use

Types of rubrics: holistic, analytic/descriptive, single-point

Holistic Rubric. A holistic rubric includes all the criteria (such as clarity, organization, mechanics, etc.) to be considered together and included in a single evaluation. With a holistic rubric, the rater or grader assigns a single score based on an overall judgment of the student’s work, using descriptions of each performance level to assign the score.

Advantages of holistic rubrics:

• Can p lace an emphasis on what learners can demonstrate rather than what they cannot
• Save grader time by minimizing the number of evaluations to be made for each student
• Can be used consistently across raters, provided they have all been trained

Disadvantages of holistic rubrics:

• Provide less specific feedback than analytic/descriptive rubrics
• Can be difficult to choose a score when a student’s work is at varying levels across the criteria
• Any weighting of c riteria cannot be indicated in the rubric

Analytic/Descriptive Rubric . An analytic or descriptive rubric often takes the form of a table with the criteria listed in the left column and with levels of performance listed across the top row. Each cell contains a description of what the specified criterion looks like at a given level of performance. Each of the criteria is scored individually.

Advantages of analytic rubrics:

• Provide detailed feedback on areas of strength or weakness
• Each criterion can be weighted to reflect its relative importance

Disadvantages of analytic rubrics:

• More time-consuming to create and use than a holistic rubric
• May not be used consistently across raters unless the cells are well defined
• May result in giving less personalized feedback

Single-Point Rubric . A single-point rubric is breaks down the components of an assignment into different criteria, but instead of describing different levels of performance, only the “proficient” level is described. Feedback space is provided for instructors to give individualized comments to help students improve and/or show where they excelled beyond the proficiency descriptors.

Advantages of single-point rubrics:

• Easier to create than an analytic/descriptive rubric
• Perhaps more likely that students will read the descriptors
• Areas of concern and excellence are open-ended
• May removes a focus on the grade/points
• May increase student creativity in project-based assignments

Disadvantage of analytic rubrics: Requires more work for instructors writing feedback

Step 3 (Optional): Look for templates and examples.

You might Google, “Rubric for persuasive essay at the college level” and see if there are any publicly available examples to start from. Ask your colleagues if they have used a rubric for a similar assignment. Some examples are also available at the end of this article. These rubrics can be a great starting point for you, but consider steps 3, 4, and 5 below to ensure that the rubric matches your assignment description, learning objectives and expectations.

Step 4: Define the assignment criteria

Make a list of the knowledge and skills are you measuring with the assignment/assessment Refer to your stated learning objectives, the assignment instructions, past examples of student work, etc. for help.

  Helpful strategies for defining grading criteria:

• Collaborate with co-instructors, teaching assistants, and other colleagues
• Brainstorm and discuss with students
• Can they be observed and measured?
• Are they important and essential?
• Are they distinct from other criteria?
• Are they phrased in precise, unambiguous language?
• Revise the criteria as needed
• Consider whether some are more important than others, and how you will weight them.

Step 5: Design the rating scale

Most ratings scales include between 3 and 5 levels. Consider the following questions when designing your rating scale:

• Given what students are able to demonstrate in this assignment/assessment, what are the possible levels of achievement?
• How many levels would you like to include (more levels means more detailed descriptions)
• Will you use numbers and/or descriptive labels for each level of performance? (for example 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and/or Exceeds expectations, Accomplished, Proficient, Developing, Beginning, etc.)
• Don’t use too many columns, and recognize that some criteria can have more columns that others . The rubric needs to be comprehensible and organized. Pick the right amount of columns so that the criteria flow logically and naturally across levels.

Step 6: Write descriptions for each level of the rating scale

Artificial Intelligence tools like Chat GPT have proven to be useful tools for creating a rubric. You will want to engineer your prompt that you provide the AI assistant to ensure you get what you want. For example, you might provide the assignment description, the criteria you feel are important, and the number of levels of performance you want in your prompt. Use the results as a starting point, and adjust the descriptions as needed.

Building a rubric from scratch

For a single-point rubric , describe what would be considered “proficient,” i.e. B-level work, and provide that description. You might also include suggestions for students outside of the actual rubric about how they might surpass proficient-level work.

For analytic and holistic rubrics , c reate statements of expected performance at each level of the rubric.

• Consider what descriptor is appropriate for each criteria, e.g., presence vs absence, complete vs incomplete, many vs none, major vs minor, consistent vs inconsistent, always vs never. If you have an indicator described in one level, it will need to be described in each level.
• You might start with the top/exemplary level. What does it look like when a student has achieved excellence for each/every criterion? Then, look at the “bottom” level. What does it look like when a student has not achieved the learning goals in any way? Then, complete the in-between levels.
• For an analytic rubric , do this for each particular criterion of the rubric so that every cell in the table is filled. These descriptions help students understand your expectations and their performance in regard to those expectations.

Well-written descriptions:

• Describe observable and measurable behavior
• Use parallel language across the scale
• Indicate the degree to which the standards are met

Step 7: Create your rubric

Create your rubric in a table or spreadsheet in Word, Google Docs, Sheets, etc., and then transfer it by typing it into Moodle. You can also use online tools to create the rubric, but you will still have to type the criteria, indicators, levels, etc., into Moodle. Rubric creators: Rubistar , iRubric

Step 8: Pilot-test your rubric

Prior to implementing your rubric on a live course, obtain feedback from:

• Teacher assistants

Try out your new rubric on a sample of student work. After you pilot-test your rubric, analyze the results to consider its effectiveness and revise accordingly.

• Limit the rubric to a single page for reading and grading ease
• Use parallel language . Use similar language and syntax/wording from column to column. Make sure that the rubric can be easily read from left to right or vice versa.
• Use student-friendly language . Make sure the language is learning-level appropriate. If you use academic language or concepts, you will need to teach those concepts.
• Share and discuss the rubric with your students . Students should understand that the rubric is there to help them learn, reflect, and self-assess. If students use a rubric, they will understand the expectations and their relevance to learning.
• Consider scalability and reusability of rubrics. Create rubric templates that you can alter as needed for multiple assignments.
• Maximize the descriptiveness of your language. Avoid words like “good” and “excellent.” For example, instead of saying, “uses excellent sources,” you might describe what makes a resource excellent so that students will know. You might also consider reducing the reliance on quantity, such as a number of allowable misspelled words. Focus instead, for example, on how distracting any spelling errors are.

Example of an analytic rubric for a final paper

	Above Average (4)	Sufficient (3)	Developing (2)	Needs improvement (1)
(Thesis supported by relevant information and ideas	The central purpose of the student work is clear and supporting ideas always are always well-focused. Details are relevant, enrich the work.	The central purpose of the student work is clear and ideas are almost always focused in a way that supports the thesis. Relevant details illustrate the author’s ideas.	The central purpose of the student work is identified. Ideas are mostly focused in a way that supports the thesis.	The purpose of the student work is not well-defined. A number of central ideas do not support the thesis. Thoughts appear disconnected.
(Sequencing of elements/ ideas)	Information and ideas are presented in a logical sequence which flows naturally and is engaging to the audience.	Information and ideas are presented in a logical sequence which is followed by the reader with little or no difficulty.	Information and ideas are presented in an order that the audience can mostly follow.	Information and ideas are poorly sequenced. The audience has difficulty following the thread of thought.
(Correctness of grammar and spelling)	Minimal to no distracting errors in grammar and spelling.	The readability of the work is only slightly interrupted by spelling and/or grammatical errors.	Grammatical and/or spelling errors distract from the work.	The readability of the work is seriously hampered by spelling and/or grammatical errors.

Example of a holistic rubric for a final paper

The audience is able to easily identify the central message of the work and is engaged by the paper’s clear focus and relevant details. Information is presented logically and naturally. There are minimal to no distracting errors in grammar and spelling. : The audience is easily able to identify the focus of the student work which is supported by relevant ideas and supporting details. Information is presented in a logical manner that is easily followed. The readability of the work is only slightly interrupted by errors. : The audience can identify the central purpose of the student work without little difficulty and supporting ideas are present and clear. The information is presented in an orderly fashion that can be followed with little difficulty. Grammatical and spelling errors distract from the work. : The audience cannot clearly or easily identify the central ideas or purpose of the student work. Information is presented in a disorganized fashion causing the audience to have difficulty following the author’s ideas. The readability of the work is seriously hampered by errors.

Single-Point Rubric

Advanced (evidence of exceeding standards)	Criteria described a proficient level	Concerns (things that need work)
	Criteria #1: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #2: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #3: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #4: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
90-100 points	80-90 points	<80 points

More examples:

• Single Point Rubric Template ( variation )
• Analytic Rubric Template make a copy to edit
• A Rubric for Rubrics
• Bank of Online Discussion Rubrics in different formats
• Mathematical Presentations Descriptive Rubric
• Math Proof Assessment Rubric
• Kansas State Sample Rubrics
• Design Single Point Rubric

Technology Tools: Rubrics in Moodle

• Moodle Docs: Rubrics
• Moodle Docs: Grading Guide (use for single-point rubrics)

Tools with rubrics (other than Moodle)

• Google Assignments
• Turnitin Assignments: Rubric or Grading Form

Other resources

• DePaul University (n.d.). Rubrics .
• Gonzalez, J. (2014). Know your terms: Holistic, Analytic, and Single-Point Rubrics . Cult of Pedagogy.
• Goodrich, H. (1996). Understanding rubrics . Teaching for Authentic Student Performance, 54 (4), 14-17. Retrieved from   
• Miller, A. (2012). Tame the beast: tips for designing and using rubrics.
• Ragupathi, K., Lee, A. (2020). Beyond Fairness and Consistency in Grading: The Role of Rubrics in Higher Education. In: Sanger, C., Gleason, N. (eds) Diversity and Inclusion in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.

Eberly Center

Teaching excellence & educational innovation, creating and using rubrics.

A rubric is a scoring tool that explicitly describes the instructor’s performance expectations for an assignment or piece of work. A rubric identifies:

• criteria: the aspects of performance (e.g., argument, evidence, clarity) that will be assessed
• descriptors: the characteristics associated with each dimension (e.g., argument is demonstrable and original, evidence is diverse and compelling)
• performance levels: a rating scale that identifies students’ level of mastery within each criterion  

Rubrics can be used to provide feedback to students on diverse types of assignments, from papers, projects, and oral presentations to artistic performances and group projects.

Benefitting from Rubrics

• reduce the time spent grading by allowing instructors to refer to a substantive description without writing long comments
• help instructors more clearly identify strengths and weaknesses across an entire class and adjust their instruction appropriately
• help to ensure consistency across time and across graders
• reduce the uncertainty which can accompany grading
• discourage complaints about grades
• understand instructors’ expectations and standards
• use instructor feedback to improve their performance
• monitor and assess their progress as they work towards clearly indicated goals
• recognize their strengths and weaknesses and direct their efforts accordingly

Examples of Rubrics

Here we are providing a sample set of rubrics designed by faculty at Carnegie Mellon and other institutions. Although your particular field of study or type of assessment may not be represented, viewing a rubric that is designed for a similar assessment may give you ideas for the kinds of criteria, descriptions, and performance levels you use on your own rubric.

• Example 1: Philosophy Paper This rubric was designed for student papers in a range of courses in philosophy (Carnegie Mellon).
• Example 2: Psychology Assignment Short, concept application homework assignment in cognitive psychology (Carnegie Mellon).
• Example 3: Anthropology Writing Assignments This rubric was designed for a series of short writing assignments in anthropology (Carnegie Mellon).
• Example 4: History Research Paper . This rubric was designed for essays and research papers in history (Carnegie Mellon).
• Example 1: Capstone Project in Design This rubric describes the components and standards of performance from the research phase to the final presentation for a senior capstone project in design (Carnegie Mellon).
• Example 2: Engineering Design Project This rubric describes performance standards for three aspects of a team project: research and design, communication, and team work.

Oral Presentations

• Example 1: Oral Exam This rubric describes a set of components and standards for assessing performance on an oral exam in an upper-division course in history (Carnegie Mellon).
• Example 2: Oral Communication This rubric is adapted from Huba and Freed, 2000.
• Example 3: Group Presentations This rubric describes a set of components and standards for assessing group presentations in history (Carnegie Mellon).

Class Participation/Contributions

• Example 1: Discussion Class This rubric assesses the quality of student contributions to class discussions. This is appropriate for an undergraduate-level course (Carnegie Mellon).
• Example 2: Advanced Seminar This rubric is designed for assessing discussion performance in an advanced undergraduate or graduate seminar.

See also " Examples and Tools " section of this site for more rubrics.

CONTACT US to talk with an Eberly colleague in person!

• Faculty Support
• Graduate Student Support
• Canvas @ Carnegie Mellon
• Quick Links

Center for Teaching Innovation

Resource library.

• AACU VALUE Rubrics

Using rubrics

A rubric is a type of scoring guide that assesses and articulates specific components and expectations for an assignment. Rubrics can be used for a variety of assignments: research papers, group projects, portfolios, and presentations.  

Why use rubrics? 

Rubrics help instructors: 

• Assess assignments consistently from student-to-student. 
• Save time in grading, both short-term and long-term. 
• Give timely, effective feedback and promote student learning in a sustainable way. 
• Clarify expectations and components of an assignment for both students and course teaching assistants (TAs). 
• Refine teaching methods by evaluating rubric results. 

Rubrics help students: 

• Understand expectations and components of an assignment. 
• Become more aware of their learning process and progress. 
• Improve work through timely and detailed feedback. 

Considerations for using rubrics 

When developing rubrics consider the following:

• Although it takes time to build a rubric, time will be saved in the long run as grading and providing feedback on student work will become more streamlined.  
• A rubric can be a fillable pdf that can easily be emailed to students. 
• They can be used for oral presentations. 
• They are a great tool to evaluate teamwork and individual contribution to group tasks. 
• Rubrics facilitate peer-review by setting evaluation standards. Have students use the rubric to provide peer assessment on various drafts. 
• Students can use them for self-assessment to improve personal performance and learning. Encourage students to use the rubrics to assess their own work. 
• Motivate students to improve their work by using rubric feedback to resubmit their work incorporating the feedback. 

Getting Started with Rubrics 

• Start small by creating one rubric for one assignment in a semester.  
• Ask colleagues if they have developed rubrics for similar assignments or adapt rubrics that are available online. For example, the  AACU has rubrics  for topics such as written and oral communication, critical thinking, and creative thinking. RubiStar helps you to develop your rubric based on templates.  
• Examine an assignment for your course. Outline the elements or critical attributes to be evaluated (these attributes must be objectively measurable). 
• Create an evaluative range for performance quality under each element; for instance, “excellent,” “good,” “unsatisfactory.” 
• Avoid using subjective or vague criteria such as “interesting” or “creative.” Instead, outline objective indicators that would fall under these categories. 
• The criteria must clearly differentiate one performance level from another. 
• Assign a numerical scale to each level. 
• Give a draft of the rubric to your colleagues and/or TAs for feedback. 
• Train students to use your rubric and solicit feedback. This will help you judge whether the rubric is clear to them and will identify any weaknesses. 
• Rework the rubric based on the feedback. 

• help_outline help

iRubric: English Self Introduction rubric

      '; }         delete   Do more...

Rubric Code: By Ready to use Public Rubric Subject:    Type:    Grade Levels: 6-8, 9-12

Oral Presentation Evaluation

• Oral presentation of current event evaluation
• Communication
• Presentation

Skip to Content

Other ways to search:

• Events Calendar

Rubrics are a set of criteria to evaluate performance on an assignment or assessment. Rubrics can communicate expectations regarding the quality of work to students and provide a standardized framework for instructors to assess work. Rubrics can be used for both formative and summative assessment. They are also crucial in encouraging self-assessment of work and structuring peer-assessments. 

Why use rubrics?

Rubrics are an important tool to assess learning in an equitable and just manner. This is because they enable:

• A common set of standards and criteria to be uniformly applied, which can mitigate bias
• Transparency regarding the standards and criteria on which students are evaluated
• Efficient grading with timely and actionable feedback 
• Identifying areas in which students need additional support and guidance 
• The use of objective, criterion-referenced metrics for evaluation 

Some instructors may be reluctant to provide a rubric to grade assessments under the perception that it stifles student creativity (Haugnes & Russell, 2018). However, sharing the purpose of an assessment and criteria for success in the form of a rubric along with relevant examples has been shown to particularly improve the success of BIPOC, multiracial, and first-generation students (Jonsson, 2014; Winkelmes, 2016). Improved success in assessments is generally associated with an increased sense of belonging which, in turn, leads to higher student retention and more equitable outcomes in the classroom (Calkins & Winkelmes, 2018; Weisz et al., 2023). By not providing a rubric, faculty may risk having students guess the criteria on which they will be evaluated. When students have to guess what expectations are, it may unfairly disadvantage students who are first-generation, BIPOC, international, or otherwise have not been exposed to the cultural norms that have dominated higher-ed institutions in the U.S (Shapiro et al., 2023). Moreover, in such cases, criteria may be applied inconsistently for students leading to biases in grades awarded to students.

Steps for Creating a Rubric

Clearly state the purpose of the assessment, which topic(s) learners are being tested on, the type of assessment (e.g., a presentation, essay, group project), the skills they are being tested on (e.g., writing, comprehension, presentation, collaboration), and the goal of the assessment for instructors (e.g., gauging formative or summative understanding of the topic). 

Determine the specific criteria or dimensions to assess in the assessment. These criteria should align with the learning objectives or outcomes to be evaluated. These criteria typically form the rows in a rubric grid and describe the skills, knowledge, or behavior to be demonstrated. The set of criteria may include, for example, the idea/content, quality of arguments, organization, grammar, citations and/or creativity in writing. These criteria may form separate rows or be compiled in a single row depending on the type of rubric.

(See row headers  of  Figure 1 )

Create a scale of performance levels that describe the degree of proficiency attained for each criterion. The scale typically has 4 to 5 levels (although there may be fewer levels depending on the type of rubrics used). The rubrics should also have meaningful labels (e.g., not meeting expectations, approaching expectations, meeting expectations, exceeding expectations). When assigning levels of performance, use inclusive language that can inculcate a growth mindset among students, especially when work may be otherwise deemed to not meet the mark. Some examples include, “Does not yet meet expectations,” “Considerable room for improvement,” “ Progressing,” “Approaching,” “Emerging,” “Needs more work,” instead of using terms like “Unacceptable,” “Fails,” “Poor,” or “Below Average.”

(See column headers  of  Figure 1 )

Develop a clear and concise descriptor for each combination of criterion and performance level. These descriptors should provide examples or explanations of what constitutes each level of performance for each criterion. Typically, instructors should start by describing the highest and lowest level of performance for that criterion and then describing intermediate performance for that criterion. It is important to keep the language uniform across all columns, e.g., use syntax and words that are aligned in each column for a given criteria. 

(See cells  of  Figure 1 )

It is important to consider how each criterion is weighted and for each criterion to reflect the importance of learning objectives being tested. For example, if the primary goal of a research proposal is to test mastery of content and application of knowledge, these criteria should be weighted more heavily compared to other criteria (e.g., grammar, style of presentation). This can be done by associating a different scoring system for each criteria (e.g., Following a scale of 8-6-4-2 points for each level of performance in higher weight criteria and 4-3-2-1 points for each level of performance for lower weight criteria). Further, the number of points awarded across levels of performance should be evenly spaced (e.g., 10-8-6-4 instead of 10-6-3-1). Finally, if there is a letter grade associated with a particular assessment, consider how it relates to scores. For example, instead of having students receive an A only if they received the highest level of performance on each criterion, consider assigning an A grade to a range of scores (28 - 30 total points) or a combination of levels of performance (e.g., exceeds expectations on higher weight criteria and meets expectations on other criteria). 

(See the numerical values in the column headers  of  Figure 1 )

Figure 1:  Graphic describing the five basic elements of a rubric

Note : Consider using a template rubric that can be used to evaluate similar activities in the classroom to avoid the fatigue of developing multiple rubrics. Some tools include Rubistar or iRubric which provide suggested words for each criteria depending on the type of assessment. Additionally, the above format can be incorporated in rubrics that can be directly added in Canvas or in the grid view of rubrics in gradescope which are common grading tools. Alternately, tables within a Word processor or Spreadsheet may also be used to build a rubric. You may also adapt the example rubrics provided below to the specific learning goals for the assessment using the blank template rubrics we have provided against each type of rubric. Watch the linked video for a quick introduction to designing a rubric . Word document (docx) files linked below will automatically download to your device whereas pdf files will open in a new tab.

Types of Rubrics

In these rubrics, one specifies at least two criteria and provides a separate score for each criterion. The steps outlined above for creating a rubric are typical for an analytic style rubric. Analytic rubrics are used to provide detailed feedback to students and help identify strengths as well as particular areas in need of improvement. These can be particularly useful when providing formative feedback to students, for student peer assessment and self-assessments, or for project-based summative assessments that evaluate student learning across multiple criteria. You may use a blank analytic rubric template (docx) or adapt an existing sample of an analytic rubric (pdf) . 

Fig 2: Graphic describing a sample analytic rubric (adopted from George Mason University, 2013)

These are a subset of analytical rubrics that are typically used to assess student performance and engagement during a learning period but not the end product. Such rubrics are typically used to assess soft skills and behaviors that are less tangible (e.g., intercultural maturity, empathy, collaboration skills). These rubrics are useful in assessing the extent to which students develop a particular skill, ability, or value in experiential learning based programs or skills. They are grounded in the theory of development (King, 2005). Examples include an intercultural knowledge and competence rubric (docx)  and a global learning rubric (docx) .

These rubrics consider all criteria evaluated on one scale, providing a single score that gives an overall impression of a student’s performance on an assessment.These rubrics also emphasize the overall quality of a student’s work, rather than delineating shortfalls of their work. However, a limitation of the holistic rubrics is that they are not useful for providing specific, nuanced feedback or to identify areas of improvement. Thus, they might be useful when grading summative assessments in which students have previously received detailed feedback using analytic or single-point rubrics. They may also be used to provide quick formative feedback for smaller assignments where not more than 2-3 criteria are being tested at once. Try using our blank holistic rubric template docx)  or adapt an existing sample of holistic rubric (pdf) . 

Fig 3: Graphic describing a sample holistic rubric (adopted from Teaching Commons, DePaul University)

These rubrics contain only two levels of performance (e.g., yes/no, present/absent) across a longer list of criteria (beyond 5 levels). Checklist rubrics have the advantage of providing a quick assessment of criteria given the binary assessment of criteria that are either met or are not met. Consequently, they are preferable when initiating self- or  peer-assessments of learning given that it simplifies evaluations to be more objective and criteria can elicit only one of two responses allowing uniform and quick grading. For similar reasons, such rubrics are useful for faculty in providing quick formative feedback since it immediately highlights the specific criteria to improve on. Such rubrics are also used in grading summative assessments in courses utilizing alternative grading systems such as specifications grading, contract grading or a credit/no credit grading system wherein a minimum threshold of performance has to be met for the assessment. Having said that, developing rubrics from existing analytical rubrics may require considerable investment upfront given that criteria have to be phrased in a way that can only elicit binary responses. Here is a link to the checklist rubric template (docx) .

Fig. 4: Graphic describing a sample checklist rubric

A single point rubric is a modified version of a checklist style rubric, in that it specifies a single column of criteria. However, rather than only indicating whether expectations are met or not, as happens in a checklist rubric, a single point rubric allows instructors to specify ways in which criteria exceeds or does not meet expectations. Here the criteria to be tested are laid out in a central column describing the average expectation for the assignment. Instructors indicate areas of improvement on the left side of the criteria, whereas areas of strength in student performance are indicated on the right side. These types of rubrics provide flexibility in scoring, and are typically used in courses with alternative grading systems such as ungrading or contract grading. However, they do require the instructors to provide detailed feedback for each student, which can be unfeasible for assessments in large classes. Here is a link to the single point rubric template (docx) .

Fig. 5 Graphic describing a single point rubric (adopted from Teaching Commons, DePaul University)

Best Practices for Designing and Implementing Rubrics

When designing the rubric format, descriptors and criteria should be presented in a way that is compatible with screen readers and reading assistive technology. For example, avoid using only color, jargon, or complex terminology to convey information. In case you do use color, pictures or graphics, try providing alternative formats for rubrics, such as plain text documents. Explore resources from the CU Digital Accessibility Office to learn more.

Co-creating rubrics can help students to engage in higher-order thinking skills such as analysis and evaluation. Further, it allows students to take ownership of their own learning by determining the criteria of their work they aspire towards. For graduate classes or upper-level students, one way of doing this may be to provide learning outcomes of the project, and let students develop the rubric on their own. However, students in introductory classes may need more scaffolding by providing them a draft and leaving room for modification (Stevens & Levi 2013). Watch the linked video for tips on co-creating rubrics with students . Further, involving teaching assistants in designing a rubric can help in getting feedback on expectations for an assessment prior to implementing and norming a rubric. 

When first designing a rubric, it is important to compare grades awarded for the same assessment by multiple graders to make sure the criteria are applied uniformly and reliably for the same level of performance. Further, ensure that the levels of performance in student work can be adequately distinguished using a rubric. Such a norming protocol is particularly important to also do at the start of any course in which multiple graders use the same rubric to grade an assessment (e.g., recitation sections, lab sections, teaching team). Here, instructors may select a subset of assignments that all graders evaluate using the same rubric, followed by a discussion to identify any discrepancies in criteria applied and ways to address them. Such strategies can make the rubrics more reliable, effective, and clear.

Sharing the rubric with students prior to an assessment can help familiarize students with an instructor’s expectations. This can help students master their learning outcomes by guiding their work in the appropriate direction and increase student motivation. Further, providing the rubric to students can help encourage metacognition and ability to self-assess learning.

Sample Rubrics

Below are links to rubric templates designed by a team of experts assembled by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) to assess 16 major learning goals. These goals are a part of the Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) program. All of these examples are analytic rubrics and have detailed criteria to test specific skills. However, since any given assessment typically tests multiple skills, instructors are encouraged to develop their own rubric by utilizing criteria picked from a combination of the rubrics linked below.

• Civic knowledge and engagement-local and global
• Creative thinking
• Critical thinking
• Ethical reasoning
• Foundations and skills for lifelong learning
• Information literacy
• Integrative and applied learning
• Intercultural knowledge and competence
• Inquiry and analysis
• Oral communication
• Problem solving
• Quantitative literacy
• Written Communication

Note : Clicking on the above links will automatically download them to your device in Microsoft Word format. These links have been created and are hosted by Kansas State University . Additional information regarding the VALUE Rubrics may be found on the AAC&U homepage . 

Below are links to sample rubrics that have been developed for different types of assessments. These rubrics follow the analytical rubric template, unless mentioned otherwise. However, these rubrics can be modified into other types of rubrics (e.g., checklist, holistic or single point rubrics) based on the grading system and goal of assessment (e.g., formative or summative). As mentioned previously, these rubrics can be modified using the blank template provided.

• Oral presentations  
• Painting Portfolio (single-point rubric)
• Research Paper
• Video Storyboard

Additional information:

Office of Assessment and Curriculum Support. (n.d.). Creating and using rubrics . University of Hawai’i, Mānoa

Calkins, C., & Winkelmes, M. A. (2018). A teaching method that boosts UNLV student retention . UNLV Best Teaching Practices Expo , 3.

Fraile, J., Panadero, E., & Pardo, R. (2017). Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students. Studies In Educational Evaluation , 53, 69-76

Haugnes, N., & Russell, J. L. (2016). Don’t box me in: Rubrics for àrtists and Designers . To Improve the Academy , 35 (2), 249–283. 

Jonsson, A. (2014). Rubrics as a way of providing transparency in assessment , Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 39(7), 840-852 

McCartin, L. (2022, February 1). Rubrics! an equity-minded practice . University of Northern Colorado

Shapiro, S., Farrelly, R., & Tomaš, Z. (2023). Chapter 4: Effective and Equitable Assignments and Assessments. Fostering International Student Success in higher education (pp, 61-87, second edition). TESOL Press.

Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2013). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning (second edition). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Teaching Commons (n.d.). Types of Rubrics . DePaul University

Teaching Resources (n.d.). Rubric best practices, examples, and templates . NC State University 

Winkelmes, M., Bernacki, M., Butler, J., Zochowski, M., Golanics, J., & Weavil, K.H. (2016). A teaching intervention that increases underserved college students’ success . Peer Review , 8(1/2), 31-36.

Weisz, C., Richard, D., Oleson, K., Winkelmes, M.A., Powley, C., Sadik, A., & Stone, B. (in progress, 2023). Transparency, confidence, belonging and skill development among 400 community college students in the state of Washington . 

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2009). Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) . 

Canvas Community. (2021, August 24). How do I add a rubric in a course? Canvas LMS Community.

 Center for Teaching & Learning. (2021, March 03). Overview of Rubrics . University of Colorado, Boulder

 Center for Teaching & Learning. (2021, March 18). Best practices to co-create rubrics with students . University of Colorado, Boulder.

Chase, D., Ferguson, J. L., & Hoey, J. J. (2014). Assessment in creative disciplines: Quantifying and qualifying the aesthetic . Common Ground Publishing.

Feldman, J. (2018). Grading for equity: What it is, why it matters, and how it can transform schools and classrooms . Corwin Press, CA.

Gradescope (n.d.). Instructor: Assignment - Grade Submissions . Gradescope Help Center. 

Henning, G., Baker, G., Jankowski, N., Lundquist, A., & Montenegro, E. (Eds.). (2022). Reframing assessment to center equity . Stylus Publishing. 

 King, P. M. & Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2005). A developmental model of intercultural maturity . Journal of College Student Development . 46(2), 571-592.

Selke, M. J. G. (2013). Rubric assessment goes to college: Objective, comprehensive evaluation of student work. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

The Institute for Habits of Mind. (2023, January 9). Creativity Rubrics - The Institute for Habits of Mind . 

• Assessment in Large Enrollment Classes
• Classroom Assessment Techniques
• Creating and Using Learning Outcomes
• Early Feedback
• Five Misconceptions on Writing Feedback
• Formative Assessments
• Frequent Feedback
• Online and Remote Exams
• Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
• Student Peer Assessment
• Student Self-assessment
• Summative Assessments: Best Practices
• Summative Assessments: Types
• Assessing & Reflecting on Teaching
• Departmental Teaching Evaluation
• Equity in Assessment
• Glossary of Terms
• Attendance Policies
• Books We Recommend
• Classroom Management
• Community-Developed Resources
• Compassion & Self-Compassion
• Course Design & Development
• Course-in-a-box for New CU Educators
• Enthusiasm & Teaching
• First Day Tips
• Flexible Teaching
• Grants & Awards
• Inclusivity
• Learner Motivation
• Making Teaching & Learning Visible
• National Center for Faculty Development & Diversity
• Open Education
• Student Support Toolkit
• Sustainaiblity
• TA/Instructor Agreement
• Teaching & Learning in the Age of AI
• Teaching Well with Technology

Teach Starter, part of Tes Teach Starter, part of Tes

Search  everything  in all resources

Oral Presentation Assessment Rubric

Updated:  24 Jul 2020

A rubric designed to help teachers to assess students' oral presentations.

Editable:  Word

Non-Editable:  PDF

Pages:  1 Page

• Curriculum Curriculum:  AUS V9, AUS V8

Years:  3 - 6

• Adobe Reader (pdf) Sign up to Plus
• Microsoft Word (dotx) Sign up to Plus

This assessment rubric for oral presentations can be used to determine whether students are working below expectations, to expectations or above expectations in the following areas:

• preparedness
• stance/posture
• eye contact

A section for the teacher to add a personal comment is also provided.

Teach Starter Publishing

We create premium quality, downloadable teaching resources for primary/elementary school teachers that make classrooms buzz!

Write a review to help other teachers and parents like yourself. If you'd like to request a change to this resource, or report an error, select the corresponding tab above.

Suggest a Change

Would you like something changed or customised on this resource? While our team makes every effort to complete change suggestions, we can't guarantee that every change will be completed.

Report an Error

Did you spot an error on this resource? Please let us know and we will fix it shortly.

Are you having trouble downloading or viewing this resource? Please try the following steps:

• Check that you are logged in to your account
• For premium resources, check that you have a paid subscription
• Check that you have installed Adobe Reader ( download here )

If you are still having difficulty, please visit the Teach Starter Help Desk or contact us .

You may also like

• Speaking and Listening →
• Assessment Rubrics →

Adjective Grammar Card Game – Flip It!

A fun game for students to play in small groups to consolidate their understanding of adjectives.

Adverb Grammar Card Game – Flip It!

A fun game for students to play in small groups to consolidate their understanding of adverbs.

Queensland Cursive Entries and Exits Spaceship - Blue

A set of 12 Queensland Cursive entry and exit shuttles to join together to make a handwriting spaceship.

Bloom's Taxonomy Fast Finisher Task Cards - Upper Years

44 Bloom's Taxonomy fast finisher activity cards.

Verb Grammar Card Game – Flip It!

A fun game for students to play in small groups to consolidate their understanding of verbs.

Queensland Cursive Entries and Exits Spaceship - Purple

Queensland Cursive Entries and Exits Spaceship - Red

Direct and Indirect Speech Posters

Amazing Man helps students to learn what both direct and indirect speech entails as well as providing examples on how they can use it themselves.

Writing Checklists - Various Genres

Use these Writing Checklists to ensure that your students have everything they need in their pieces of writing.

Desk Plate Alphabet and Number Line - Butterflies and Lady Bugs

Lower Grade Desk Plates with the alphabet, number line and student's name on them.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Relationship between students’ perception of a rubric for oral presentations and their academic characteristics.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 2.1. participants, 2.2. design of the intervention.

• The composition of the teams was made by the professor in accordance with the criterion of alphabetical order on the list.
• The teams were composed of between 5 and 7 students.
• The duration of the presentation had to be between 25 and 35 min.
• On the same day as the evaluation, the teams were given a sheet with the presentation divided into parts in line with the number of participants, and the professor decided which member should present each of the parts. The aim of this was that all the members had to know the whole presentation.
• In each oral presentation, both the professor and the students who were not making the presentation had to evaluate the team using a rubric. The final mark of the oral presentation was made up 60% by the professor, 30% by the students, and 10% in the form of self-evaluation.
• Before the students were given their mark, they were asked to fill out an anonymous questionnaire on their perception of the validity of the rubric and another on their self-regulation.

2.3. Rubric

2.4. rubric validity perception questionnaire, 2.5. assessment of academic performance, 2.6. self-regulation questionnaire, 3. statistical analysis, 4.1. relationship between students’ perception of the validity and usefulness of the rubric and academic characteristics of students.

Item	Mean (SD)
1. I have found it very appropriate to assess the presentations.	4.3 (0.6)
2. I found it very easy to use.	4.5 (0.7)
3. The number of items was adequate.	4.1 (0.9)
4. It was easy for each item to know the assessment of each group.	4.0 (0.7)
5. Having the rubric it is easier to prepare a presentation to get a good mark.	4.3 (0.8)
6. With the rubric you can evaluate more fairly.	4.1 (0.7)
7. The rubric has helped us to prepare the presentation.	3.9 (1.0)
8. The rubric includes the most important aspects of the presentation to evaluate.	4.1 (0.7)
9. I recommend using the rubric in future years	4.4 (0.6)
10. Total rating (sum of all items; maximum rating = 45).	37.7 (4.0)

4.2. Professor–Student Congruence of Evaluation

5. discussion, 6. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, conflicts of interest.

• García-Ros, R. Análisis y Validación de Una Rúbrica Para Evaluar Habilidades de Presentación Oral En Contextos Universitarios. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 2011 , 9 , 1043–1062. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Cooper, K.M.; Ashley, M.; Brownell, S.E. A Bridge to Active Learning: A Summer Bridge Program Helps Students Maximize Their Active-Learning Experiences and the Active-Learning Experiences of Others. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2017 , 16 , ar17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Knight, J.K.; Wise, S.B.; Rentsch, J.; Furtak, E.M. Cues Matter: Learning Assistants Influence Introductory Biology Student Interactions during Clicker-Question Discussions. CBE—Life Sci. Educ. 2015 , 14 , ar41. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Mann, K.V. Theoretical Perspectives in Medical Education: Past Experience and Future Possibilities. Med. Educ. 2011 , 45 , 60–68. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Živković, S. The Importance of Oral Presentations for University Students. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 2014 , 5 , 468. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Verano-Tacoronte, D.; González-Betancor, S.M.; Bolívar-Cruz, A.; Fernández-Monroy, M.; Galván-Sánchez, I.; Verano-Tacoronte, D.; González-Betancor, S.M.; Bolívar-Cruz, A.; Fernández-Monroy, M.; Galván-Sánchez, I. Valoración de la competencia de comunicación oral de estudiantes universitarios a través de una rúbrica fiable y válida. Rev. Bras. Educ. 2016 , 21 , 39–60. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Dasí, A.; Iborra, M. La Evaluación de Los Estudiantes En La Educación Superior. LA Mejora de La Comunicación Oral: Una Perspectiva de Proceso ; Servei de Formació Permanent; Universitat de València: Valencia, Spain, 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Murillo-Zamorano, L.R.; Montanero, M. Oral Presentations in Higher Education: A Comparison of the Impact of Peer and Teacher Feedback. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 2018 , 43 , 138–150. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dunbar, N.E.; Brooks, C.F.; Kubicka-Miller, T. Oral Communication Skills in Higher Education: Using a Performance-Based Evaluation Rubric to Assess Communication Skills. Innov. High. Educ. 2006 , 31 , 115. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Van Ginkel, S.; Laurentzen, R.; Mulder, M.; Mononen, A.; Kyttä, J.; Kortelainen, M.J. Assessing Oral Presentation Performance: Designing a Rubric and Testing Its Validity with an Expert Group. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 2017 , 9 , 474–486. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Popham, W.J. What’s Wrong–and What’s Right–with Rubrics. Educ. Leadersh. 1997 , 55 , 72–75. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reddy, Y.M.; Andrade, H. A Review of Rubric Use in Higher Education. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 2010 , 35 , 435–448. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jonsson, A.; Svingby, G. The Use of Scoring Rubrics: Reliability, Validity and Educational Consequences. Educ. Res. Rev. 2007 , 2 , 130–144. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Panadero, E.; Jonsson, A. A Critical Review of the Arguments against the Use of Rubrics. Educ. Res. Rev. 2020 , 30 , 100329. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Andrade, H.; Du, Y. Student Perspectives on Rubric-Referenced Assessment. Educ. Couns. Psychol. Fac. Scholarsh. 2005 , 10 , 3. Available online: https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/edpsych_fac_scholar/2 (accessed on 8 April 2022).
• Barney, S.; Khurum, M.; Petersen, K.; Unterkalmsteiner, M.; Jabangwe, R. Improving Students with Rubric-Based Self-Assessment and Oral Feedback. IEEE Trans. Educ. 2012 , 55 , 319–325. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Brookhart, S.M.; Chen, F. The Quality and Effectiveness of Descriptive Rubrics. Educ. Rev. 2015 , 67 , 343–368. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Contreras-Higuera, W.E.; Martínez-Olmo, F.; José Rubio-Hurtado, M.; Vilà-Baños, R. University Students’ Perceptions of E-Portfolios and Rubrics as Combined Assessment Tools in Education Courses. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2016 , 54 , 85–107. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Eshun, E.F.; Osei-Poku, P. Design Students Perspectives on Assessment Rubric in Studio-Based Learning. J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract. 2013 , 10 , 8. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1005281 (accessed on 20 April 2022). [ CrossRef ]
• Priego Quesada, J.; Requena-Bueno, L.; Jiménez-Pérez, I.; García-Ros, R. ¿Implicar a Los Estudiantes En La Modificación de Rúbricas Influye Sobre Su Percepción de Validez? In V Congreso de Innovación Educativa y Docencia en Red ; Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València: Valencia, Spain, 2019; pp. 329–342. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fraile, J.; Panadero, E.; Pardo, R. Co-Creating Rubrics: The Effects on Self-Regulated Learning, Self-Efficacy and Performance of Establishing Assessment Criteria with Students. Stud. Educ. Eval. 2017 , 53 , 69–76. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Panadero, E.; Tapia, J.A.; Huertas, J.A. Rubrics and Self-Assessment Scripts Effects on Self-Regulation, Learning and Self-Efficacy in Secondary Education. Learn. Individ. Differ. 2012 , 22 , 806–813. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Efklides, A. Interactions of Metacognition with Motivation and Affect in Self-Regulated Learning: The MASRL Model. Educ. Psychol. 2011 , 46 , 6–25. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alonso-Tapia, J.; Panadero Calderón, E.; Díaz Ruiz, M.A. Development and Validity of the Emotion and Motivation Self-Regulation Questionnaire (EMSR-Q). Span. J. Psychol. 2014 , 17 , E55. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Keshmiri, F.; Ponzer, S.; Sohrabpour, A.; Farahmand, S.; Shahi, F.; Bagheri-Hariri, S.; Soltani-Arabshahi, K.; Shirazi, M.; Masiello, I. Contextualization and Validation of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR) through Simulation: Pilot Investigation. Med. J. Islam. Repub. Iran 2016 , 30 , 403. [ Google Scholar ]
• Curran, A.; Klein, M.; Hepokoski, M.; Packard, C. Improving the Accuracy of Infrared Measurements of Skin Temperature. Extrem. Physiol. Med. 2015 , 4 , A140. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Mosston, M.; Ashworth, S. The Spectrum of Teaching Styles: From Command to Discovery ; Longman: Harlow, UK, 1990; ISBN 978-0-8013-0350-0. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Rourke, N.; Hatcher, L.; Stepanski, E.J. A Step-by-Step Approach to Using SAS for Univariate & Multivariate Statistics ; SAS Institute: Cary, NC, USA, 2005; Available online: http://books.google.es/books?hl=es&lr=&id=pfUfzykTZ1AC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=A+Step-by-step+Approach+to+Using+SAS+for+Univariate+%26+Multivariate+Statistics&ots=8z_RqQ9Ktd&sig=q68wV7c90KexLUL5MvI6wJs3xSw (accessed on 15 May 2022).
• Weir, J.P. Quantifying Test-Retest Reliability Using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and the SEM. J. Strength Cond. Res. Natl. Strength Cond. Assoc. 2005 , 19 , 231–240. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Tomczak, M.; Tomczak, E. The Need to Report Effect Size Estimates Revisited. An Overview of Some Recommended Measures of Effect Size. Trends Sport Sci. 2014 , 1 , 19–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Andrade, H.G. Teaching with Rubrics: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Coll. Teach. 2005 , 53 , 27–31. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bennett, A.F. Interindividual Variability: An Underutilized Resource. New Dir. Ecol. Physiol. 1987 , 19 , 147–169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reitmeier, C.A.; Svendsen, L.K.; Vrchota, D.A. Improving Oral Communication Skills of Students in Food Science Courses. J. Food Sci. Educ. 2004 , 3 , 15–20. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Panadero, E.; Romero, M. To Rubric or Not to Rubric? The Effects of Self-Assessment on Self-Regulation, Performance and Self-Efficacy. Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract. 2014 , 21 , 133–148. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Andrade, H.G. The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write. Educ. Theory Pract. Fac. Scholarsh. 2001 , 6 , 1–21. Available online: http://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/etap_fac_scholar/6 (accessed on 2 February 2022).
• McCormick, M.J.; Dooley, K.E.; Lindner, J.R.; Cummins, R.L. Perceived Growth versus Actual Growth in Executive Leadership Competencies: An Application of the Stair-Step Behaviorally Anchored Evaluation Approach. J. Agric. Educ. 2007 , 48 , 23–35. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Copp, D.T. Teaching to the Test: A Mixed Methods Study of Instructional Change from Large-Scale Testing in Canadian Schools. Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract. 2018 , 25 , 468–487. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ramírez, A.G. Language Learning Strategies Used by Adolescents Studying French in New York Schools. Foreign Lang. Ann. 1986 , 19 , 131–138. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zulaihah, S.; Harida, R. Autonomous Learning Strategy of the Successful Nontraditional Students. Eltin J. J. Engl. Lang. Teach. Indones. 2017 , 5 , 71–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nicol, D.J.; Macfarlane-Dick, D. Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated Learning: A Model and Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice. Stud. High. Educ. 2006 , 31 , 199–218. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dawson, P. Assessment Rubrics: Towards Clearer and More Replicable Design, Research and Practice. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 2017 , 42 , 347–360. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Humphry, S.M.; Heldsinger, S.A. Common Structural Design Features of Rubrics May Represent a Threat to Validity. Educ. Res. 2014 , 43 , 253–263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Task	Date
Rubric training	10 October 2019
Oral presentations	From 22 October 2019 to 7 November 2019
Completion of the questionnaire on perception of the validity of the rubric and on self-regulation	7 November 2019
Publication of oral presentation marks	10 December 2019

1. Basic Principles (30%)
	Inadequate 0	To Improve 1	Appropriate 2	Very Appropriate 3
Mastery and understanding of the topic	Does not master or understand the subject	Shows a good understanding of parts of the topic, but not some of them	Shows a good understanding of parts of the topic	Expresses a complete and deep understanding of the subject
Content planning and organization	Have not planned	Difficult to follow speech and inconsistent connections, indicating poor planning and little effort	Follows a proper general outline, even if he/she gets lost or needs to pay more attention to details	Well planned speech, links topics logically and coherently
2. Application and exemplification (30%)
	Inadequate 0	To improve 1	Appropriate 2	Very appropriate 3
Consistency with the theoretical model	The developed example is not consistent with the model	The example developed is consistent with the model, although various aspects are not adequately captured	The example developed is consistent with the theoretical model, although it would need to refine some specific aspect	The example developed is consistent with the theoretical model
Model clarification and audience motivation	Selected example is confusing and does not fit the model	The example does not clarify adequately and is not motivating for the audience	The example does not clarify adequately OR is not motivating for the audience	The example is clarifying and motivating for the audience
3. Visual support (20%)
	Inadequate 0	To improve 1	Appropriate 2	Very appropriate 3
Number and explanation of slides	It does not meet the number and adequacy requirements in its explanation.	Uses an inappropriate number of slides, but tries to explain them	Adequate number of slides, although imprecise explanation of some of them	Adequate number of slides and relevant explanation of them
Suitability of the slides	It incorporates slides that are not relevant to the topic, they do not facilitate the understanding or motivation of the audience.	Although most of them are related to the topic, they do not favor their understanding or the motivation of the audience	All are related to the topic and facilitate material understanding, although some are not connected with speech or suffer from amenity	All are related to the topic and connection with the discourse, facilitating the understanding of the material, and are entertaining/attention-grabbing
Readability	Illegible, overwhelming use of colors, abuse of text and paragraphs	Handwriting readable by approximately 85% audience, excessive length in mostly slides. Inadequate color contrast	Handwriting readable for the entire audience, more than 5 lines per slide. Adequate contrast of colors	No more than 5 lines per slide, font legible for the entire audience, adequate contrast of colors
Relevance and appropriateness of images/diagrams	Does not use or distract	According to content, although not relevant and low resolution	Relevant, consistent with content on most occasions, but little resolution	Relevant, consistent with content, and with adequate resolution
Sequencing, animations, slide transitions	No order, excessive or no use. Animation and transition that facilitate distraction	Logical order, although animation is missing and only applies transitions on some slide, or does both improperly	Logical order, animation of unimportant points or transitions that impede attention	Animation of important points, helps focus attention on what is important and avoids being distracted
4. Communication skills (20%)
	Inadequate 0	To improve 1	Appropriate 2	Very appropriate 3
Volume and tone of voice	Too low to be heard by all and excessively monotonous	Loud enough to be heard around 70% of the time by everyone and/or inappropriate tone (monotonous, boring)	Loud enough to be heard by all and adequate tone of voice around 90%	Loud enough and with an appropriate tone of voice to be heard by the entire audience
Clarity in speech	Little clarity. Often mumbles and mispronounces words	Speaks clearly 85–90% of the time and mispronounces numerous words	He speaks clearly 90–95% of the time, although he mispronounces some words	Speak clearly practically all of the time.
Pauses and use of taglines	Doesn’t use pauses on purpose. Tagline abuse. Large number of incomplete sentences	Inadequate number of pauses –by excess or defect-, introduce some at unexpected moments or frequently use taglines (um…, ehhh…, well… etc.). Uses a lot of incomplete sentences	Uses pauses correctly but introduces some in an unexpected/inappropriate way. Uses taglines on several occasions (um…, ehhh…, good… etc.). Uses incomplete sentences more than 5% of the time	Use pauses correctly and at the end of sentences. Use complete sentences more than 95% of the time
Posture and eye contact	Does not maintain eye contact and body posture is inadequate	Sometimes maintains an upright posture and maintains eye contact with the audience, but less than 90% of the time	Upright posture and makes eye contact with everyone, although some indicators of tension/disinterest are observed	Straight back, relaxed and confident posture, make eye contact with everyone
5. Innovation and creativity (+0.5)
If creative and innovative elements have been incorporated, +0.5 can be added to the final grade. In the case of peer evaluation, this +0.5 will be considered if it is requested by more than 50% of the evaluations.

Items of the Emotion and Motivation Self-Regulation Questionnaire
Learning-oriented self-regulation (α = 0.84)
1	This is going O.K.! … It seems that I understand it.
2	Calm down… “Do not hurry, do not stop” … You’ll get it.
3	Well… It seems that every time I do it better… I’m progressing…
4	How interesting! It seems to me that I understand it.
5	How difficult, but how interesting!… I have to understand how to do it.
6	This is not right… I’m going to check it step by step.
7	How complicated!… Well, I’ll go on… it is important to learn how to solve it.
8	Here was the mistake! Great! Next time I will know how to do it.
Performance/avoidance oriented self-regulation (α = 0.77)
9	This is not worth my time… Let’s try to finish it as soon as possible
10	This task is a complete loss of time!
11	What instructions so long! They only make me confused.
12	What a boring task! Let’s see if I finish and leave.
13	I’m dead tired… Well, I had to go on to pass.
14	I must go on… if I do not, I’ll fail.
15	What a mess! Well… Go on… if not you won’t pass the exam.
16	What a tiring task!… But I have to pass… Let’s continue.
17	What a stressful task! I’m doing it very bad… It’s so difficult!
18	This is so difficult… I am not going to be able to make it right.
19	I am not made for doing this. If I could, I would give it up.
20	I am getting nervous… I’m not able to do it.

Academic Characteristic	Mean (SD)
Oral presentation mark provided by students (max 10 points)	8.5 (0.6)
Oral presentation mark provided by professor (max 10 points)	8.7 (0.9)
Final oral presentation mark (max 10 points)	8.8 (0.7)
Subject mark (max 10 points)	8.2 (1.3)
Academic record (max 10 points)	7.7 (0.6)
Learning oriented self-regulation (max 40 points)	28.9 (4.5)
Performance/avoidance oriented self-regulation (max 60 points)	35.7 (7.4)

	Pearson’s Correlation (p-Value)
Item	Final Oral Presentation Mark	Subject Mark	Academic Record	Self-Regulation Learning	Self-Regulation Performance
1. I have found it very appropriate to assess the presentations.	0.01 (0.94)	−0.15 (0.16)		0.08 (0.45)	0.01 (0.90)
2. I found it very easy to use.	−0.04 (0.74)	−0.15 (0.16)		0.08 (0.45)	−0.06 (0.59)
3. The number of items was adequate.	0.01 (0.96)	−0.05 (0.64)	−0.19 (0.08)		−0.04 (0.74)
4. It was easy for each item to know the assessment of each group.	0.01 (0.97)	0.04 (0.73)	−0.12 (0.29)	0.10 (0.34)	−0.04 (0.72)
5. Having the rubric it is easier to prepare a presentation to get a good mark.		0.04 (0.69)	−0.10 (0.39)	0.19 (0.08)	−0.01 (0.93)
6. With the rubric you can evaluate more fairly.	0.04 (0.71)	0.01 (0.92)	−0.13 (0.23)		−0.03 (0.79)
7. The rubric has helped us to prepare the presentation.	0.13 (0.25)	0.06 (0.56)	0.06 (0.60)	0.13 (0.23)	−0.07 (0.52)
8. The rubric includes the most important aspects of the presentation to evaluate.	−0.15 (0.16)	−0.18 (0.11)	−0.02 (0.86)	0.20 (0.07)	−0.12 (0.26)
9. I recommend using the rubric in future years.	−0.14 (0.21)	−0.14 (0.20)	−0.16 (0.16)		−0.09 (0.41)
10. Total rating (sum of all items; maximum rating = 45).	0.03 (0.79)	−0.08 (0.47)	−0.20 (0.07)		−0.08 (0.45)

MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

Ferrer-Pardo, V.R.; Jimenez-Perez, I.; Gil-Calvo, M.; Pérez-Soriano, P.; Priego-Quesada, J.I. Relationship between Students’ Perception of a Rubric for Oral Presentations and Their Academic Characteristics. Educ. Sci. 2022 , 12 , 765. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12110765

Ferrer-Pardo VR, Jimenez-Perez I, Gil-Calvo M, Pérez-Soriano P, Priego-Quesada JI. Relationship between Students’ Perception of a Rubric for Oral Presentations and Their Academic Characteristics. Education Sciences . 2022; 12(11):765. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12110765

Ferrer-Pardo, Víctor Raul, Irene Jimenez-Perez, Marina Gil-Calvo, Pedro Pérez-Soriano, and Jose Ignacio Priego-Quesada. 2022. "Relationship between Students’ Perception of a Rubric for Oral Presentations and Their Academic Characteristics" Education Sciences 12, no. 11: 765. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12110765

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Rating Count
• Price (Ascending)
• Price (Descending)
• Most Recent

Self assessment rubric oral presentation

Resource type.

Retelling a Short Story Oral Presentation Rubric Student Self Assessment Element

Current Events Oral Presentation : Worksheets, Rubric , & Student Self - Assessment

Self Assessment Rubric : Oral Presentation

Puppet Show Oral Presentation Rubric Student Self Assessment Short Story Retell

Speaking and Listening Rubrics {3-5} Common Core Aligned

Grade 1 Morning Messages for Oral and Nonverbal Communication

Presentation & Oral Speaking Skills Assessment Checklist Rubric Middle Schooler

ORAL COMMUNICATION rubric self-evaluation Core French Immersion Primary

French Recipe Oral Presentation Project

Student Rubric Template

ORAL PRESENTATION | PRODUCTION ORALE | RUBRICS , ASSESSMENT , SUCCESS CRITERIA

ORAL COMMUNICATION SKILLS rubric checklist self-evaluation JUNIOR English

ORAL COMMUNICATION SKILLS rubric checklist self-evaluation PRIMARY English

Talk The Talk! How To Prepare a Great Oral Presentation

Bundle - Variety of Self , Peer and Teacher Assessments

ORAL COMMUNICATION rubric self-evaluation Core French Immersion Junior

Oral Presentation Rubric 1

Editable Rubric Templates for Project Based Learning Assessments

Middle/High School Oral Presentation Rubric | Google Ready Resource

French Writing and Oral Rubric (EDITABLE) Perfect for Assignments!

Oral Presentation Rubric Grades 6-8

Grade 1 Morning Messages (September) Oral Communication and Comprehension

Presentation Rubric ( Oral presentation in front of class)

Complete Oral Interpretation Speech Lesson

• We're hiring
• Help & FAQ
• Privacy policy
• Student privacy
• Terms of service
• Tell us what you think