The rubric evaluates technical seminars based on 5 criteria:
1. Literature review - Excellent reviews thoroughly describe previous related work and clearly explain how current work fits in the field.
2. Knowledge - Excellent demonstrates deep knowledge and answers questions with explanations.
3. Communication skills - Excellent maintains eye contact, uses a clear expressive voice, and has poised delivery without distractions.
4. Presentation - Excellent presents information in a logical sequence with clear introductions, conclusions, and context.
5. Report - An excellent report is fully formatted with appropriate references and explanations of key concepts.
The rubric evaluates technical seminars based on 5 criteria:
1. Literature review - Excellent reviews thoroughly describe previous related work and clearly explain how current work fits in the field.
2. Knowledge - Excellent demonstrates deep knowledge and answers questions with explanations.
3. Communication skills - Excellent maintains eye contact, uses a clear expressive voice, and has poised delivery without distractions.
4. Presentation - Excellent presents information in a logical sequence with clear introductions, conclusions, and context.
5. Report - An excellent report is fully formatted with appropriate references and explanations of key concepts.
The rubric evaluates technical seminars based on 5 criteria:
1. Literature review - Excellent reviews thoroughly describe previous related work and clearly explain how current work fits in the field.
2. Knowledge - Excellent demonstrates deep knowledge and answers questions with explanations.
3. Communication skills - Excellent maintains eye contact, uses a clear expressive voice, and has poised delivery without distractions.
4. Presentation - Excellent presents information in a logical sequence with clear introductions, conclusions, and context.
5. Report - An excellent report is fully formatted with appropriate references and explanations of key concepts.
1. Literature Mentions other Describes Thoroughly, Review work done previous and concisely, in field; related describes connections to work; makes previous and related current work not connection to work; clearly as clear. current explains how current work. work fits into broader field.
2. Knowledge in Superficial Adequate Demonstrates deep
basic engineering knowledge of knowledge of knowledge; topic; only most topics; answer the able to answer answer the questions with basic questions. questions, but explanations and fails to elaboration. elaborate.
3 Communication Difficult to hear; Most of Entire
Skills. occasional eye audience can audience can hear contact; some hear presentation; maintains mumbling, little presentation; eye contact or eye contact with audience; clear, no expression; most expressive nervous, some of the time; voice; distracting clear voice, but poised, good posture, mannerisms; not no distracting reads much of as mannerisms. slide. expressive; a little nervous, not as polished.
4. Presentation Some problems Most Presented in logical
with sequencing, information sequence; lacks clear presented in introduction and transitions; logical background incomplete or sequence; clear give proper context; overly detailed introduction; key points and introduction; adequate conclusions are clear emphasis given background; and well to less important some irrelevant developed. information. information
5. Report Seminar report is Seminar report Seminar report is
according t is according to the o the according to specified format; specified format the references and but some specified citations are mistakes. format; appropriate and well In-sufficient references and mentioned; references and citations are complete explanation citations. appropriate but of the key concepts all key concepts not are not explained mentioned and very little well; complete relevance to explanation of