Excellent Good
Information is carefully Information is carefully
Judgment selected and crafted into
tight and focused
/20 arguments.
The introduction flows
exceptionally well. It is
clear that an extremely
solid argument was
Content formed in favor of their
position.
1. /50 The rebuttal and cross-
examination question are
very well-considered and
2. /50 make great use of the
opponent’s arguments.
3. /50 The cross-examination
response shows great
familiarity with the topic
at hand.
The conclusion is concise
and effective.
The language is very
persuasive. It is clear that
the team paid particular
Language attention to the vocabulary
that they are using.
/10
The delivery is smooth and
confident with no
hesitations.
Delivery
The team members make a
/20 point to consider both the
audience and their
opponents.
Acceptable
Information is selected
selected and crafted into
good arguments.
The introduction flows
well. It is clear that a solid
argument was formed in
favor of their position.
The rebuttal and cross-
examination question are
well-considered and make
conscious use of the
opponent’s arguments.
The cross-examination
response shows good
familiarity with the topic
at hand.
The conclusion is
effective.
The language is
persuasive. The
vocabulary that the team is
using is well-considered
for their position.
The delivery is smooth and
confident with few
hesitations.
The team members show
awareness of both the
audience and their
opponents.
Poor
Information is selected
rather arbitrarily but the
arguments still work to an
extent.
The introduction is
somewhat disorganized.
The argument works but
does not always flow
together.
The rebuttal and cross-
examination questions are
somewhat considered and
make use of the
opponent’s arguments.
The cross-examination
response shows some
familiarity with the topic
at hand.
The conclusion is
somewhat effective.
Persuasive language is not
always clear. The
vocabulary is sometimes
well-considered,
The delivery is hesitant but
still somewhat smooth.
The team members show
some awareness of both
the audience and their
opponents.
Unacceptable
Inaccurate information
arbitrarily and the
arguments make little
sense.
The introduction is
disorganized. The
argument does not flow
together, which distracts
from the main point.
The rebuttal and cross-
examination questions are
little considered and/or
make little use of the
opponent’s arguments.
The cross-examination
response shows that the
team is not very familiar
with their topic.
The conclusion is not very
effective.
Persuasive language is
unclear. There was very
little consideration put into
the vocabulary used.
The delivery is not smooth
and contains many
hesitations.
The team members show
little awareness of the
audience and their
opponents.
was selected OR nothing
was done.
The introduction was not
done properly and no
arguments were made.
The rebuttal and cross-
examination questions are
not well considered and/or
do not make use of the
opponent’s arguments.
The cross-examination
response shows that the
team is not at all familiar
with their topic.
The conclusion is not
effective at all.
Persuasive language is not
used. There was no
consideration put into the
vocabulary used.
The delivery is
unintelligible.
The team members do not
seem to be aware of their
audience and their
opponents.