The student did not show an adequate understanding of the topic | The student appeared to understand the main points of the topic and presents them with ease. | The student clearly understands the topic indepth and presents information with ease. | The student understands the topic indepth and presents information forcefully and convincingly. |
The student's presentation style did not keep the attention of the audience. | The student used limited gestures, eyecontact, tone of voice, and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the audience's attention. | The student used gestures, eyecontact, tone of voice, and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the audience's attention. | The student consistently used gestures, eyecontact, tone of voice, and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the audience's attention. |
Information had several inaccuracies or was not clear. | Most information presented in the debate was clear and accurate, but not thorough. | Most information presented in the debate was clear, accurate, and thorough. | All information presented in the debate was clear, accurate, and thorough. |
Every point was not supported | Every major point was supported with facts, statistics, and/or examples, but the relevance of some was questionable. | Every major point was adequately supported with facts, statistics, and/or examples. | Every major point was well supported with several facts, statistics, and/or examples. |
Statements, responses, and/or body language were consistently not respectful. | Most statements and responses were respectful and in appropriate language, but there are sarcastic remarks. | Statements and responses were respectful and used appropriate language, but some body language was not. | All statements, body language and responses were respectful and in appropriate language. |
Counter-arguements were not accurate and/or relevant. | Most counter-arguemetns were accurate and relevant, but several were weak. | Most counter-arguements were accurate, relevant, and strong. | All counter-arguements were accurate, relevant and strong. |