RUBRIC DTI 01
GROUP PRESENTATION ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
For written translation courses (with Oral Delivery)
Basic translation, Translation practice, Advanced Translation 1, Advanced Translation 3, Advanced Translation 3,
Criteria Unsatisfactory-Beginning
Content (40) 0-20 points
 The content shows a lack of
understanding of the words/
expressions/ text features
related to the given
translation topic.
 There is inadequate evidence
of research and insufficient
relevant explanation of
words/expressions/ text
analysis.
 The suggested translation is
confusing and/or contains
frequent inaccurate
translation equivalents.
 No learnt translation
techniques or theories are
employed.
 Sources, if included,
generally lack proper citation
format (APA 6th ed.).
Design (20) 0-11 points
 Slides generally lack visual
appeal and/or exhibit an
overuse of color or
animations.
 No cited sources are
provided for used visual aids.
 No theme is evident and the
presentation appears
disjointed rather than unified.
Business translation
Developing
21-35 points
 The content shows a general
understanding of the words/
expressions/ text features
related to the given
translation topic.
 There is limited evidence of
research and insufficient
relevant explanation of
words/expressions/ text
analysis.
 The suggested translation is
confusing and/or contains
some inconsistent,
inaccurate, and
misinterpreted/ ambiguous
translation equivalents.
 Few specific translation
techniques or theories are
employed.
 Sources, if included, may be
improperly cited (APA 6th ed.).
12-16 points
 Slides generally include a mix
of white space, visuals,
and/or text but not
consistently and/or some
overuse or inappropriate use
of color or animations.
 Some cited sources are not
provided for used visual aids
 Theme is not consistently
Accomplished
36-50 points
 The content shows an
adequate understanding of the
words/expressions/text
features related to the given
translation topic.
 There is some reliable
evidence of research and
sufficient relevant explanation
of words/expression/ text
analysis.
 The suggested translation is
understandable and contains
few inconsistent, inaccurate,
and misinterpreted translation
equivalents.
 Specific translation techniques
or theories are appropriately
employed.
 Sources, if included, are
properly cited to the most part
(APA 6th ed.).
17-18 points
 Slides are effectively designed  Slides are visually well
with visual appeal including
white space, visuals, and
minimal text for the most part.
Color and animations are used
appropriately.
 Cited sources are provided for
used visual aids.
 Theme (e.g., template) is
Exemplary
51-60 points
 The content shows a thorough
understanding of the
words/expressions/text features
related to the given translation
topic.
 There is plenty reliable
evidence of research and
sufficient relevant explanation
of words/expression/ text
analysis.
 The suggested translation is
accurate and effective and
contains consistent, logic and
accurate translation
equivalents.
 Specific translation techniques
or theories are creatively and
appropriately employed.
 Sources, if included, are all
properly cited (APA 6th ed.).
19-20 points
designed, aesthetically
pleasing with appropriate use
of white space, visuals, and
sufficient text, on each slide.
Color and animations are used
judiciously.
 Cited sources are provided for
used visual aids.
  The texts in the SL and TL
are separated and difficult to
compare and contrast.
 There are frequent errors
(grammar, punctuation,
spelling, formatting, etc.) on
the slides
Speaker 0-11 points
quality (20)  Speakers were ineffective in
delivering ideas,
demonstrating below
average/poor
communication skills.
 Speakers present
substantially over/under the
time limit and/or not all
members presented.
 Lack of preparation was
evident.
Handout (10) 0-3 points
 The main points in the
handout are poorly
presented and difficult to
follow.
 Writing in the handout
demonstrates a below
average/poor writing style
with frequent errors in
spelling, grammar,
punctuation, and/or usage.
Timeliness* Deduct 10 points
and Length Collaborative presentation is
(* unexcused completed 2-3 days (49-72
late) hours) or more after the
deadline and/or substantially
evident throughout the
presentation.
 The texts in the SL and TL
are not separated but difficult
to compare and contrast.
 There are some errors
(grammar, punctuation,
spelling, formatting, etc.) on
the slides
12-16 points
 Speakers are somewhat
effective in delivering ideas,
demonstrating average
communication skills.
 Speakers are slightly
over/under the time limit.
 Some members presented
more than others. More
preparation was needed.
4-6 points
 The main points in the
handout are ineffectively
presented and difficult to
follow.
 Writing in the handout
demonstrates an average
writing style with some
errors in spelling, grammar,
punctuation, and/or usage.
Deduct 6-9 points
Collaborative presentation is
completed 1-2 days (25-48
hours) after the deadline and/or
is somewhat lacking (or
evident in the presentation for
the most part to produce a
cohesive presentation.
 The texts in the SL and TL are
parallel and easy to compare
and contrast.
 There are some minor errors
(grammar, punctuation,
spelling, formatting, etc.) on
the slides.
17-18 points
 Speakers are effective in
delivering ideas,
demonstrating good
communication skills
 Speakers are generally close
to the time limit for the group
to present (20 minutes total).
 All group members presented
and preparation was evident
for the most part.
7-8 points
 The main points in the
handout are effectively
presented and easy to follow.
 Writing in the handout
demonstrates an above
average writing style with little
grammar, punctuation,
spelling, and or usage errors.
Deduct 1-5 points
Collaborative presentation is
completed within 1 day (24
hours) after the deadline and
meets the required length
 Theme (e.g., template) is
evident in the presentation for
the most part to produce a
cohesive presentation.
 The texts in the SL and TL are
parallel and easy to compare
and contrast.
 There are some minor errors
(grammar, punctuation,
spelling, formatting, etc.) on the
slides.
19-20 points
 Speakers are highly effective
in delivering ideas,
demonstrating excellent
communication skills
 Speakers are tied to the time
limit for the group to present
(20 minutes total).
 All group members presented
equally. Preparation was
strongly evident.
4-10 points
 The main points in the
handout are effectively and
creatively presented and easy
to follow.
 Writing in the handout
demonstrates a strong writing
style basically free from
grammar, punctuation,
spelling, or usage errors.
0 points deducted
Collaborative presentation is
completed by the deadline and
meets the required length
 lacks/exceeds the required
length.
GROUP MEMBER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Contribution 0-4 points
to Group
(10)  The member rarely
participated or contributed
to the project towards
achieving the goals and
meeting the deadline.
 The member did not share
workload fairly and/or was
a disruptive influence.
exceeds) the required length.
(Individual grade)
5-6 points
 The member participated in
the project but emphasis
was in completing own
work.
 The member allowed others
to assume leadership and/or
may have not shared
workload fairly towards
achieving the project goals
and meeting deadlines.
7-8 points 9-10 points
 The member participated  The member participated
in the project and shared fully in the project and
the workload. shared the workload fairly.
 The member contributed  The member contributed
to the development of the to the development of the
presentation. presentation and assisted
in editing others’ work to
 The member worked
produce a polished
towards achieving the
presentation.
project goals and meeting
deadlines.  The member coordinated
the group’s efforts and/or
demonstrated leadership to
facilitate and achieve the
project goals and meet
deadlines.