|
Debate Rubric : Old School Global
Conference (OSGC) |
||||
|
CATEGORY |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
Information |
All
information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough. |
Most
information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough. |
Most
information presented in the debate was clear and accurate, but was not
usually thorough. |
Information
had several inaccuracies OR was usually not clear. |
|
Rebuttal |
All
counter-arguments were accurate, relevant and strong. |
Most
counter-arguments were accurate, relevant, and strong. |
Most
counter-arguments were accurate and relevant, but several were weak. |
Counter-arguments
were not accurate and/or relevant |
|
Use of Facts/Statistics |
Every
major point was well supported with several relevant facts, statistics and/or
examples. |
Every
major point was adequately supported with relevant facts, statistics and/or
examples. |
Every
major point was supported with facts, statistics and/or examples, but the
relevance of some was questionable. |
Every
point was not supported. |
|
Presentation Style |
Team
consistently used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of
enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience. |
Team
usually used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of enthusiasm
in a way that kept the attention of the audience. |
Team
sometimes used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice
and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience. |
One or
more members of the team had a presentation style that did not keep the
attention of the audience. |
|
Organization |
All
arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight,
logical fashion. |
Most
arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight,
logical fashion. |
All
arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) but the organization was
sometimes not clear or logical. |
Arguments
were not clearly tied to an idea (premise). |
|
Understanding of Topic |
The team
clearly understood the topic in-depth and presented their information
forcefully and convincingly. |
The team
clearly understood the topic in-depth and presented their information with
ease. |
The team
seemed to understand the main points of the topic and presented those with
ease. |
The team
did not show an adequate understanding of the topic. |