Department of Translation, CUHK

Assessment Rubrics and Grade Descriptors for Individual Presentations

Final grade/mark: B+ (80/100)
Additional feedback: This is an excellent and enjoyable presentation. Very well done, Peiying!
For content, you effectively combined Nida’s dynamic equivalence & Skopos theory to support a more TT-oriented approach. Your analysis of the example is
focused and clear. However, since your example comes from a translation textbook, it will be important to acknowledge any impact the textbook may have had on
your version.
For organization, your presentation is clearly structured and justification is easy to follow. Please summarise your findings in a conclusion. You may also wish to
justify the omission of “shameless” and the translation of “not voluptuous” into “并不怎么繁华” (many people might still consider Manchester, UK’s second
largest city, as 繁华).
For presentation skills, excellent work with clear pronunciation, speech and effective PPT design. Well done!

Grade A Grade B Grade C Grade D Grade F

Content  excellent choice of topic
involving sophisticated
research and reasoning
 defines clearly the practical
and theoretical elements of the
topic
 excellent and very convincing
application of theory (theories)
in the process of analysis
 much evidence of independent
research and critical thinking
 good choice of topic involving
satisfactory research and
reasoning
 mentions the practical and
theoretical elements of the
topic
 good and convincing
application of theory (theories)
in the process of analysis
 some evidence of independent
research and critical thinking
 fair choice of topic involving
limited research and reasoning
 limited explanation of the
practical and theoretical
elements of the topic
 fair but limited application of
theory (theories) in the process
of analysis
 limited evidence of
independent research and
critical thinking
 poor choice of topic involving
very limited, superficial, and
unsatisfactory research and
reasoning
 very limited explanation of the
practical and theoretical
elements of the topic
 poor and very limited
application of theory (theories)
in the process of analysis
 little evidence of independent
research and critical thinking
 inappropriate choice of topic
showing lack of basic
understanding of relevant
research and discussion
 no mention of practical and
theoretical elements
 no application of theory
(theories) in the process of
analysis
 no evidence of independent
research and critical thinking
Organization  sophisticated, lucid, and
persuasive argumentation with
recognizable originality
 justifies arguments
impressively
Presentation skills and  excellent time management
audience design  very appropriate tone and style
 very clear and fluent
 excellent command of English
and/or Chinese
 Any supporting materials
(PPT, Prezi, handout) are
clearly laid out and easy to
follow, meshing seamlessly
with spoken presentation
 Excellent eye contact with all
or most of audience
 fluent and expressive body
language, including hand
gestures
 solid argumentation with some
originality
 justifies arguments well
 good time management
 appropriate tone and style
 clear and fluent
 good command of English
and/or Chinese
 Any supporting materials
(PPT, Prezi, handout) are fairly
clearly laid out and fairly easy
to follow, meshing well with
spoken presentation
 good eye contact with majority
of the audience
 good body language, including
hand gestures
 limited development of
argumentation
 insufficient explanation or
limited justification of
arguments
 fair time management
 tone and style not always
appropriate
 not always clear and fluent
 fair command of English
and/or Chinese
 Any supporting materials
(PPT, Prezi, handout) are not
always clear or easy to follow,
and do not always seem to
mesh with spoken presentation
 some eye contact with at least
a few audience members
 some body language
 poor development of
argumentation
 unclear and illogical
explanation of the arguments
 poor time management
 tone and style mostly
inappropriate
 mostly unclear and not fluent
 poor command of English
and/or Chinese
 Any supporting materials
(PPT, Prezi, handout) are not
clear and are difficult to
follow, and barely mesh with
spoken presentation
 little or no eye contact
 little body language
 no development of
argumentation
 no explanation and
justification of arguments
 very poor time management
 inappropriate tone and style
 very unclear and not fluent
 very poor command of English
and/or Chinese
 Any supporting materials
(PPT, Prezi, handout) are
opaque and impossible to
follow, seemingly unrelated to
spoken presentation
 no eye contact
 no body language