This document provides a rubric to evaluate presentations on a scale from excellent to fair. It evaluates introductions, quality and depth of information about the interviewee, use of visual aids, and cooperation between presenters. An excellent presentation includes a clear introduction, precise and in-depth information representing major events of the interviewee's life, high-quality visual aids relevant to the topic, and equal work between cooperative presenters. A fair presentation lacks an introduction, has insufficient information about the interviewee, no visual aids, and an uncooperative effort with uneven work between presenters.

1. EXCELLENT GOOD AVERAGE FAIR
INTRODUCTION Introduction to presentation explains who is
being presented, how they conducted the
interview and the way that they will be
presenting and why
Short introduction, but does set up who
is being presented.
Introduction does not relate to
presentation.
No introduction to
presentation.
QUALITY OF INFORMATION Information clearly represents the interview
including major events and details of their
life.
Information represents the interview but
presentation did not include major
events or small details of their life.
Information represents the interview
but missing major events and
details.
Information did not have any
major events or details of
the interview.
CONTENT DEPTH -
COMPLEXITY
Precise data; in-depth; well supported;
develops complex concepts and
relationships, beyond expected level;
analyzes multiple perspectives and issues,
abstract thinking.
Covers topic effectively; well developed;
explores the topic beyond facts and
details; critical thinking evident;
compares and contrasts.
Valid content but little depth or
elaboration; sparse information and
presentation, simple, basic
information; limited critical thinking
is evident.
Needs more information or
more accurate information,
information was insufficient
or irrelevant, very simple.
VISUAL AIDS Visual aids were used, were legible and
relevant to the interviewee and were of high
quality
Visual aids used were legible and
relevant to topic/interviewee
Visual aids were not legible or did
not relate to the interview
No visual aids
COOPERATION Works well with partner. Sharing and using
others ideas. Equal time given to both
presenters. This will be evaluated through
your individual summaries which highlights
the work that your partner you have each
contributed.
Worked well together and shared ideas,
but one did most of the presenting.
This will be evaluated through your
individual summaries which highlights
the work that your partner you have
each contributed.
Somewhat cooperative, but still
seemed to do it their own way. This
will be evaluated through your
individual summaries which
highlights the work that your partner
you have each contributed.
Completely un-cooperative.
This will be evaluated
through your individual
summaries which highlights
the work that your partner
you have each contributed.