EAC PO Category

Time

Style

Visuals

Structure/Format
PO9 - Communication

Content & Explanation

Q&A
Excellent 80-100
The presenter proceeds at a good pace and
without deviating from it finishes right on
time or no more than a few minutes earlier.
No reminder of time is necessary, all content
is presented as planned.
The presenter speaks naturally using
appropriate language. He has a good rapport
with the audience, draws the audience in and
holds their attention throughout. The
presentation is fluent and the presenter
seems to enjoy giving it.
Well designed visual material that is clearly
visible and legible and adds to the
presentation. There is a clear link between
the presented material and the visuals, which
help the audience to understand, and do not
distract from the presentation
The presentation and visuals are well
structured, with a clear logical progression
from begiining to end.
At the end of the presentation, the audience
has a clear idea of why the work was
undertaken, how it was done, and how the
presenter explains the results obtained. The
presenter comes across as competent and his
explanations are convincing.
Good 60-79
The presenter finishes a few minutes early
or very slightly overuns. For the most part
the pace is right, but efforts are at times
obvious to stall for time or speed up to
finish. No intervention from the chair is
required for the presenter to do this.
The presentation is essentially fluent and
natural, with a few minor flaws such as
overlong pauses or incomplete sentences.
The audience stay on-board for the most
part with a few minor digressions.
Most of the visuals are clear, connected and
helpful. There are a few minor flaws where
parts are difficult to see or read, or the
connection and purpose is not immediately
obvious.
The presentation and visuals are almost
well structured with a few incidences where
the progression is broken and material
presented out of sequence. Introduction
and conclusions are there, and visuals are
coherent.
The audience has a good idea what was
done and why, some minor uncertainties
may remain. For the most part the
presenters explanations are clear, logical
and convincing, with only a few incidences
where it seems uncertainties are glossed
over, or omissions are made that make it
hard to follow the presenters trail of
thought.
The presentation inspires almost exclusively The presenter deals well with all questions
high end questions and discussion. The of a clarification nature. It inspires some
audience does not need to clarify purpose, higher end questions, and the presenter
method or presentation of results. The deals reasonably well with them.
questions lead to a debate on scientific issues
or wider implications/applications. The
presenter deals well with all questions, to the
extend of being able to handle questions
even when he is unsure of the answer or the
question is far outside the project remit.
Average 40-59 Poor <40 Weight
The presentation is noticably too short for The presenter uses less than half of the
the time slot, or overruns it significantly. time allocated. Or the presenter does not
Despite efforts to slow down or speed up the finish at all despite speeding up and
presenter cannot fit it into the timeslot. The skipping material. The session leader has to
chair has to call time, but the speaker finishes interrupt and finally terminate the
without being terminated. unfinished presentation.

The presenter is shows evidence of
discomfort or being un- or overprepared.
Sections are read from the presentation
slides or notes, or large parts feel rehearsed
and unnatural. Audience has to make an
effort to follow.
0.5
The presenter ignores the audience for the
most part, and is intent on rattling off a
memorised or read-out script. Or the
presenter is poorly prepared, looses his
thread repeatedly, or uses inappropriate
language. Audience struggles to follow.

1
Some of the visuals seem ill thought out, are For the most part the visual material is
hard to see or read and distract the audience, unhelpful and disconnected form the
while others are helpful and support the presentation. It seems carelessly put
presentation. There are serious flaws such as together with little thought about design or
too much text or unpleasant colour schemes perception by the audience.

There is insuffiencent time devoted to
introducing and/or summing up the project.
Start and/or finish seem too abrupt. The
progression isn't strictly logical and the
presenter hops through slides out of
sequence or needs to add information that
should have been mentioned earlier.
1
The presentation feels unstructured and no
logic seems to apply to the sequence of the
material presented. Start and finish are not
obvious or adequate. The material seems
thrown together with little thought.

The audience feels that additional content
would be needed to fully understand the
project. There are questions over why it was
done, how it was done or what the outcome
is remaining. Some outcomes are left
unexplained or explained poorly.
1
The audience feels confused and is unclear
about the purpose of the work. There are
significant gaps resulting in not getting the
full picture of what was done and what the
outcome is. The presenter struggles to
explain much of his work in such a way that
the audience can follow.

3.5
The presenter deals reasonably well with
clarification type questions, and can
elaborate on what was presented, but
struggles with higher end, wider reaching
questions going beyond the scope of the
presentation.
The presenter struggles with some or all
questions, even relatively straightforward
ones asking for elaboration on the
presented content. He does not inspire or
cannot cope with questions going beyond
the narrow remit of the presentation.
3
10