Father Saturnino Urios University

Engineering and Technology Program

Butuan City

ORAL DEFENSE ASSESSMENT

Unsatisfactory/Does Not Meet Satisfactory/Meets

Attribute A B C D/E
Expectations Expectations
Overall ☐ Poorly organized paper/ 2 2 2 2/2 ☐ Clearly organized
presentation presentation paper/presentation
1 1 1 1/1
quality ☐ Poor presentation ☐ Clear presentation
1 1 1 1/1
☐ Poor communication skills 1 1 1 1/1 ☐ Good communication skills
☐ Slides and handouts are difficult to ☐ Slides and handouts clear
read 1 1 1 1/1
☐ Presentation reveals critical ☐ Presentation demonstrates
weaknesses in depth of knowledge in depth of knowledge in subject
the subject matter matter
Quality of ☐ Responses were incomplete 1 1 1 1/1 ☐ Responses were complete
response to ☐ Respondent exhibited lack of 1 1 1 1/1 ☐ Respondent exhibited
questions/critical knowledge in subject area adequate knowledge in subject
thinking skills area
1 1 1 1/1
☐ Responses did not meet level 2 2 2 2/2 ☐ Responses met level
expected expected
☐ Presentation does not reflect well ☐ Presentation demonstrates
developed critical thinking skills critical thinking skills
Total scores 89 8 89 89/8
9 9
To deduct scores: 1 – less one, 2 – less two, 3 – less three, 4 – less four, 5 – less five
Names
A. Talal Sultan
B. Nikhalypsys Nemeno
C. Loraine Cacanindin
D. Marjon Timtim
E. Hannah Bianca Trillo
Area of Improvement/s and general comments: (see separate paper)
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
(95-100) 9 out 9 (Excellent) – Passed with few revisions
(90 – 94) 8 out 9 (Very satisfactory) – Passed with some general revisions
(85 – 89) 7 out 9 (Very satisfactory) – Passed with some detailed revisions
(80 – 84) 6 out 9 (satisfactory) – Passed with many detailed revisions
(75 – 79) 5 out 9 (satisfactory) – Passed with major revisions
(74) 4 and below out 9 (unsatisfactory) – Failed, subject for re-oral defense

Engr. Darwin A. Linao

________________________
Panel member