criteria for evaluating a presentation

Evaluating Business Presentations: A Six Point Presenter Skills Assessment Checklist

Posted by Belinda Huckle  |  On April 18, 2024  |  In Presentation Training, Tips & Advice

In this Article...quick links

1. Ability to analyse an audience effectively and tailor the message accordingly

2. ability to develop a clear, well-structured presentation/pitch that is compelling and persuasive, 3. ability to connect with and maintain the engagement of the audience, 4. ability to prepare effective slides that support and strengthen the clarity of the message, 5. ability to appear confident, natural and in control, 6. ability to summarise and close a presentation to achieve the required/desired outcome, effective presentation skills are essential to growth, and follow us on social media for some more great presentation tips:, don’t forget to download our presenter skills assessment form.

For many business people, speaking in front of clients, customers, their bosses or even their own large team is not a skill that comes naturally. So it’s likely that within your organisation, and indeed within your own team, you’ll find varying levels of presenting ability. Without an objective way to assess the presenter skills needed to make a good presentation, convincing someone that presentation coaching could enhance their job performance (benefiting your business), boost their promotion prospects (benefiting their career) and significantly increase their self confidence (benefiting their broader life choices) becomes more challenging.

So, how do you evaluate the presenting skills of your people to find out, objectively, where the skill gaps lie? Well, you work out your presentation skills evaluation criteria and then measure/assess your people against them. 

To help you, in this article we’re sharing the six crucial questions we believe you need to ask to not only make a professional assessment of your people’s presenting skills, but to showcase what makes a great presentation. We use them in our six-point Presenter Skills Assessment checklist ( which we’re giving away as a free download at the end of this blog post ). The answers to these questions will allow you to identify the presenter skills strengths and weaknesses (i.e. skills development opportunities) of anyone in your team or organisation, from the Managing Director down. You can then put presenter skills training or coaching in place so that everyone who needs it can learn the skills to deliver business presentations face-to-face, or online with confidence, impact and purpose.

Read on to discover what makes a great presentation and how to evaluate a presenter using our six-point Presenter Skills Assessment criteria so you can make a professional judgement of your people’s presenting skills.

If you ask most people what makes a great presentation, they will likely comment on tangible things like structure, content, delivery and slides. While these are all critical aspects of a great presentation, a more fundamental and crucial part is often overlooked – understanding your audience .  So, when you watch people in your organisation or team present, look for clues to see whether they really understand their audience and the particular situation they are currently in, such as:

• Is their content tight, tailored and relevant, or just generic?
• Is the information pitched at the right level?
• Is there a clear ‘What’s In It For Them’?
• Are they using language and terminology that reflects how their audience talk?
• Have they addressed all of the pain points adequately?
• Is the audience focused and engaged, or do they seem distracted?

For your people, getting to know their audience, and more importantly, understanding them, should always be the first step in pulling together a presentation. Comprehending the challenges, existing knowledge and level of detail the audience expects lays the foundation of a winning presentation. From there, the content can be structured to get the presenter’s message across in the most persuasive way, and the delivery tuned to best engage those listening.

Flow and structure are both important elements in a presentation as both impact the effectiveness of the message and are essential components in understanding what makes a good presentation and what makes a good speech. When analysing this aspect of your people’s presentations look for a clear, easy to follow agenda, and related narrative, which is logical and persuasive.

Things to look for include:

• Did the presentation ‘tell a story’ with a clear purpose at the start, defined chapters throughout and a strong close?
• Were transitions smooth between the ‘chapters’ of the presentation?
• Were visual aids, handouts or audience involvement techniques used where needed?
• Were the challenges, solutions and potential risks of any argument defined clearly for the audience?
• Were the benefits and potential ROI quantified/explained thoroughly?
• Did the presentation end with a clear destination/call to action or the next steps?

For the message to stick and the audience to walk away with relevant information they are willing to act on, the presentation should flow seamlessly through each part, building momentum and interest along the way. If not, the information can lose impact and the presentation its direction. Then the audience may not feel equipped, inspired or compelled to implement the takeaways.

Connecting with your audience and keeping them engaged throughout can really be the difference between giving a great presentation and one that falls flat. This is no easy feat but is certainly a skill that can be learned. To do it well, your team need a good understanding of the audience (as mentioned above) to ensure the content is on target. Ask yourself, did they cover what’s relevant and leave out what isn’t? 

Delivery is important here too. This includes being able to build a natural rapport with the audience, speaking in a confident, conversational tone, and using expressive vocals, body language and gestures to bring the message to life. On top of this, the slides need to be clear, engaging and add interest to the narrative. Which leads us to point 4…

It’s not uncommon for slides to be used first and foremost as visual prompts for the speaker. While they can be used for this purpose, the first priority of a slide (or any visual aid) should always be to support and strengthen the clarity of the message. For example, in the case of complex topics, slides should be used to visualise data , reinforcing and amplifying your message. This ensures that your slides are used to aid understanding, rather than merely prompting the speaker.

The main problem we see with people’s slides is that they are bloated with information, hard to read, distracting or unclear in their meaning. 

The best slides are visually impactful, with graphics, graphs or images instead of lines and lines of text or bullet points. The last thing you want is your audience to be focused on deciphering the multiple lines of text. Instead your slides should be clear in their message and add reinforcement to the argument or story that is being shared. How true is this of your people’s slides?

Most people find speaking in front of an audience (both small and large) at least a little confronting. However, for some, the nerves and anxiety they feel can distract from their presentation and the impact of their message. If members of your team lack confidence, both in their ideas and in themselves, it will create awkwardness and undermine their credibility and authority. This can crush a presenter and their reputation. 

This is something that you will very easily pick up on, but the good news is that it is definitely an area that can be improved through training and practice. Giving your team the tools and training they need to become more confident and influential presenters can deliver amazing results, which is really rewarding for both the individual and the organisation.

No matter how well a presentation goes, the closing statement can still make or break it. It’s a good idea to include a recap on the main points as well as a clear call to action which outlines what is required to achieve the desired outcome.

In assessing your people’s ability to do this, you can ask the following questions:

• Did they summarise the key points clearly and concisely?
• Were the next steps outlined in a way that seems achievable?
• What was the feeling in the room at the close? Were people inspired, motivated, convinced? Or were they flat, disinterested, not persuaded? 

Closing a presentation with a well-rounded overview and achievable action plan should leave the audience with a sense that they have gained something out of the presentation and have all that they need to take the next steps to overcome their problem or make something happen.

It’s widely accepted that effective communication is a critical skill in business today. On top of this, if you can develop a team of confident presenters, you and they will experience countless opportunities for growth and success.

Once you’ve identified where the skill gaps lie, you can provide targeted training to address it. Whether it’s feeling confident presenting to your leadership team or answering unfielded questions , understanding their strengths and weaknesses in presenting will only boost their presenting skills. This then creates an ideal environment for collaboration and innovation, as each individual is confident to share their ideas. They can also clearly and persuasively share the key messaging of the business on a wider scale – and they and the business will experience dramatic results.

Tailored Training to Fill Your Presentation Skill Gaps

If you’re looking to build the presentation skills of your team through personalised training or coaching that is tailored to your business, we can help. For nearly 20 years we have been Australia’s Business Presentation Skills Experts , training & coaching thousands of people in an A-Z of global blue-chip organisations. All our programs incorporate personalised feedback, advice and guidance to take business presenters further. To find out more, click on one of the buttons below:

• Work Email Address * Please enter your email address and then click ‘download’ below

Written By Belinda Huckle

Co-Founder & Managing Director

Belinda is the Co-Founder and Managing Director of SecondNature International. With a determination to drive a paradigm shift in the delivery of presentation skills training both In-Person and Online, she is a strong advocate of a more personal and sustainable presentation skills training methodology.

Belinda believes that people don’t have to change who they are to be the presenter they want to be. So she developed a coaching approach that harnesses people’s unique personality to build their own authentic presentation style and personal brand.

She has helped to transform the presentation skills of people around the world in an A-Z of organisations including Amazon, BBC, Brother, BT, CocaCola, DHL, EE, ESRI, IpsosMORI, Heineken, MARS Inc., Moody’s, Moonpig, Nationwide, Pfizer, Publicis Groupe, Roche, Savills, Triumph and Walmart – to name just a few.

A total commitment to quality, service, your people and you.

6 Ways You Can Evaluate Your Own Presentation

Hrideep barot.

• Body Language & Delivery , Presentation , Public Speaking

Naturally, giving a presentation is a skill that falls on the professional side of the spectrum. It involves a lot of formality along with practice to get good at it. 

But how do you decide what exactly it is that you need to work on? Read on to find out about six ways to evaluate your presentation skills.

Evaluating your presentation requires the ability to analyze your performance based on some very specific criteria related to delivery and content. More importantly, you must do it in an objective sense, without letting your self-bias come in the way.

Importance and benefits of evaluating your presentations yourself

Public speaking requires skills that are developed over time. Whether you’re a pro at it or a beginner, there is always room to grow because people have a varying set of abilities. 

Presentations are all about influence. You aim to create a dynamic with your audience so they buy into whatever it is that you’re trying to convey. 

And if you keep innovating your techniques and find your strength (which all comes with self-evaluating), you’ll essentially be enhancing your power to influence. 

In addition to that, it makes you a better presenter. The lack of being told what to do by someone else gives you a sense of self-confidence and patience. 

Additionally, you being a good presenter would mean more successful meetings, which in turn means you’d profit your business.

Basically, the better your presentation, the more likely are your chances to successfully fulfill your agenda. So grab a paper and a pen and embark upon your journey of getting better!

What criteria do I need to follow for evaluation?

Let’s address the skills we need for pulling off a good presentation.

Quality of content

• Engagement with audience
• Visual aids
• Focusing on strengths. 

Based on these categories, you need to form criteria to test yourself. Think of it like setting a frame of reference for yourself, placing yourself on a scale ranging between good and bad would help you track your progress. 

Following are the pointers you need to keep in mind while evaluating your presentation skills-

The two most things to keep in mind about structure is that you need to have a very intriguing start to your presentation, something that hooks the audience. (an anecdote, perhaps)

Secondly, make sure your ending is clear and in alignment with the purpose of the presentation. And include a call to action. For example, if your presentation is about mental health awareness, make sure one of your end slides has a comprehensive contact list of psychologists/therapists. 

Apart from that, the transitions between your pointers have to be smooth. Try adding segues (which is basically building context for your next point) In the previous example, a personal anecdote involving someone with depression can be a good segue to talk about the importance of mental health. 

If you’re new to structuring content or making presentations, here’s an article of ours that might help- The Ultimate Guide to Structuring a Speech

Delivery is everything. From gestures to hand movements, your body language must emphasize CONVEYING something. 

When you say something especially important, there must be some emphasis on part of your delivery. Like slowing your speech, or knocking the table, or repetition of the point, etc. 

There should be some sort of continuity to your narrative, the ‘flow’ must come naturally. This can be done using the smooth transition technique mentioned above. 

Adding a story-like quality to your speech might help. (having proper segregation between the beginning, middle, and end)

You cannot be providing generic content. Always remember, in presentations, quality surpasses quantity. 

Rambling about your topic on and on would not only bore your audience but also hinder the aforementioned flow and transitions that are so important. 

You need to make sure you’re adding something of value that is unique to you, and not general. You may refer to our article that might help further with this- Should a Presentation Have an Agenda?

Engagement with the audience

Your content must always be altered according to your audience. Knowing your audience is a very crucial step. You cannot say the same things in front of an MNC board meeting members as you would in front of a bunch of college students.

Knowing your audience helps you decide your content, flow, transition, practically everything. 

Also, engagement with the audience means the interaction that takes place between you and them. You need to appear approachable for them to talk to you. 

But at the same time, you need to prepare yourself in advance to be able to answer the questions that might come your way. A little prediction here and there can save you a lot of anxiety. 

Visual Aids

Visual aids during a presentation include everything from the design and arrangement of content in your presentation to your appearance. (But mostly the former)

Now when it comes to visual aids in a PPT, there is no better advice than the 5 by 5 rule.

The Powerpoint 5×5 slide rule states that-

a. Each of your slides should have no more than 5 lines.

b. Each of those lines should have no more than 5 words.

It ensures keeping your content crisp and to the point. A tip to apply this rule would be to not focus on including the main content in the ppt. Instead, write only pointers and elaborate on them yourself.

This way, you prevent your audience from getting too caught up in reading the slides hence getting distracted from you. 

How exactly do I evaluate my presentation?

Here are the six-pointers that will guide you through it step-by-step.

Identify patterns

Keeping in mind the above-mentioned pointers, start looking for what you’re doing wrong.

Is there something that you repetitively keep doing wrong? Maybe the topics you choose aren’t relevant, maybe you use too much text in slides, maybe you don’t captivate your audience by raising vocals, maybe you don’t move enough. 

There are always patterns. You need to develop attention to detail. 

Focus on the audience

Your audience engagement can make or break the deal. While you’re presenting, make sure you make eye contact with as many people as you can. And keep an eye out for people’s reactions. It helps you get real-time feedback. 

Now there’s a chance this might not work and you get distracted or disheartened. In which case, drop this tactic. Nothing is worth blowing your confidence down during the presentation. 

Take feedback

Part of the reward for good audience engagement is honest feedback. If people like your content but find your delivery a little off, if you engage well with them, they will be a little more open to bringing it to your attention.

Maybe to make it a little more certain, announce at the end that you’re open to constructive criticism. It also adds to the impression you make. People find people who are willing to admit their flaws, admirable. 

Make sure you maintain a record of your progress, right from making those criteria scales to your speeches through successive presentations. You could do it on paper or a device, whatever is more comfortable. 

Make notes about what you need to work on right after presentations, and tick them off when you do in the next ones. It brings along a sense of accomplishment. 

In reference to keeping track of practicing, you may check out our 13 Tips For Rehearsing A Presentation

Objective set of eyes

Ask a friend or a colleague to give you honest advice. Truth is, no matter what, your clients would always be skeptical of telling you what’s wrong. And there’s only so much you would criticize about yourself.

Asking someone you trust can help you get a fresh perspective on your progress since we get a little over in our heads sometimes. 

Use your strengths and weaknesses

After having acquainted yourself with this whole system of evaluation, it is no doubt you’d be very aware of your strong and weak points. It is a good thing. 

Honestly, there could always be some little things here and there that we cannot wrap our heads around, and that’s okay. Because we also have our strengths to cover up for them.

For example, you could be a little off with a smooth transition between subpoints, but if you drop a super-strong call to action, in the end, it gets compensated. 

And the best part is, only you can use them to your benefit since you’re the only one who knows about them!

Additionally, watching content related to your topic can be of massive help too. For example, if your speech is on mental health , then maybe watching a TEDTalk by a mental health professional can add on to the authenticity of your content.

To go that extra mile, you could also record yourself while giving the speech in front of a camera and review the recording to see where exactly you went wrong. Sometimes, watching your presentation from the audience’s perspective gives you a peak into what they see, and consequently, allows you to have a bigger impact on them.

Here’s a checklist to keep in mind while self-evaluating:

Print the checklist out for easy accessibility, mark yes or no after every presentation to keep track of your progress.

Practical Tools to use for self-evaluation

Feedback forms.

Feedback from your audience is important, as stated before. However, you can’t store all of the verbal feedback in your brain, let alone use it for self-evaluation later. Moreover, sometimes the audience might be vague with how they respond and that is unhelpful.

What you can do, instead, is devise a feedback form enlisting specific questions, the answers to which would be relevant for your purpose. This not only lifts the burden of remembering all you heard after presenting, but also eliminates unnecessary jargon from the audience.

Self-reflection

Self-reflection is the most important part of this process. Now, this does not only involve you going to the feedback forms but also reviewing specific areas that you need extra work on. You can make a categorized list or a scale of easily ‘fixable issues’ to issues that need relatively more practice and work.

If there is an issue that you don’t seem to be able to work around, another form of self-reflection you can do is record yourself. As mentioned before, use the camera and present as you would in the conference room. Looking at a tape of yourself after presenting(as opposed to while presenting in front of the mirror), can help you detect what’s wrong in a better way. Plus, it helps you check body language.

Presentation rubrics are one of the handiest tools you can use for evaluation. It is a specific set of criteria that sets qualitative standards for the things/skills you need to have in your presentation to qualify as a good one.

For example, For a college research paper, the categories of criteria would be creativity, research element, use of sources and references, innovative aspects, etc. These categories would then be assessed on a scale of good to excellent or 1 to 5 and be marked accordingly.

It provides a quantified version of assessment which helps tremendously to analyze where specifically, and how much do you need to work on.

Apart from this, if you’re a techno-savvy person who is not inclined to write with a journal to keep track or implicate any of the other tools, worry not! We happen to have just the thing to help you! In today’s technology and smart phone driven world where most things are online, we can do self-evaluation up there too!

Here is a detailed and comprehensive article about 34 Best Smartphone Apps for Presenters and Professional Speakers that will guide you through that process.

Well, with all these tools and techniques, you’re all set to begin your self-evaluation! Remember, different techniques work for different people. It’s all a matter of trial and error. Some patience and practice can take you a long way to become the presenter you aspire to be.

Enroll in our transformative 1:1 Coaching Program

Schedule a call with our expert communication coach to know if this program would be the right fit for you

8 Ways to Rise Above the Noise to Communicate Better

How to Negotiate: The Art of Getting What You Want

10 Hand Gestures That Will Make You More Confident and Efficient

• [email protected]
• +91 98203 57888

Get our latest tips and tricks in your inbox always

Copyright © 2023 Frantically Speaking All rights reserved

Kindly drop your contact details so that we can arrange call back

Select Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria AmericanSamoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Romania Rwanda Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Wallis and Futuna Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe land Islands Antarctica Bolivia, Plurinational State of Brunei Darussalam Cocos (Keeling) Islands Congo, The Democratic Republic of the Cote d'Ivoire Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Guernsey Holy See (Vatican City State) Hong Kong Iran, Islamic Republic of Isle of Man Jersey Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Lao People's Democratic Republic Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Macao Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Mozambique Palestinian Territory, Occupied Pitcairn Réunion Russia Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan Da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tome and Principe Somalia Svalbard and Jan Mayen Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tanzania, United Republic of Timor-Leste Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

What It Takes to Give a Great Presentation

• Carmine Gallo

Five tips to set yourself apart.

Never underestimate the power of great communication. It can help you land the job of your dreams, attract investors to back your idea, or elevate your stature within your organization. But while there are plenty of good speakers in the world, you can set yourself apart out by being the person who can deliver something great over and over. Here are a few tips for business professionals who want to move from being good speakers to great ones: be concise (the fewer words, the better); never use bullet points (photos and images paired together are more memorable); don’t underestimate the power of your voice (raise and lower it for emphasis); give your audience something extra (unexpected moments will grab their attention); rehearse (the best speakers are the best because they practice — a lot).

I was sitting across the table from a Silicon Valley CEO who had pioneered a technology that touches many of our lives — the flash memory that stores data on smartphones, digital cameras, and computers. He was a frequent guest on CNBC and had been delivering business presentations for at least 20 years before we met. And yet, the CEO wanted to sharpen his public speaking skills.

• Carmine Gallo is a Harvard University instructor, keynote speaker, and author of 10 books translated into 40 languages. Gallo is the author of The Bezos Blueprint: Communication Secrets of the World’s Greatest Salesman  (St. Martin’s Press).

Partner Center

Mayo's Clinics

• Email Subscription

Use Clear Criteria and Methodologies When Evaluating PowerPoint Presentations

Dr. Fred Mayo explains the three major methods for presentation evaluation: self, peer and professional. An added bonus: ready-made student evaluation form.

By Dr. Fred Mayo, CHE, CHT

In the last issue, we discussed making interactive presentations and this month we will focus on evaluating presentations. For many of us, encouraging and supporting students in making presentations is already a challenge; assessing their merit is often just another unwelcome teaching chore.

There are three major methods for evaluating presentation – self evaluations, peer evaluations, and professional evaluations. Of course, the most important issue is establishing evaluation criteria.

Criteria for Evaluating Presentations One of the best ways to help students create and deliver good presentations involves providing them with information about how their presentations will be evaluated. Some of the criteria that you can use to assess presentations include:

• Focus of the presentation
• Clarity and coherence of the content
• Thoroughness of the ideas presented and the analysis
• Clarity of the presentation
• Effective use of facts, statistics and details
• Lack of grammatical and spelling errors
• Design of the slides
• Effective use of images
• Clarity of voice projection and appropriate volume
• Completion of the presentation within the allotted time frame

Feel free to use these criteria or to develop your own that more specifically match your teaching situation.

Self Evaluations When teaching public speaking and making presentations, I often encouraged students to rate their own presentations after they delivered them. Many times, they were very insightful about what could have been improved. Others just could not complete this part of the assignment. Sometimes, I use their evaluations to make comments on what they recognized in their presentations. However, their evaluations did not overly influence the grade except that a more thorough evaluation improved their grade and a weak evaluation could hurt their presentation grade.

Questions I asked them to consider included:

• How do you think it went?
• What could you have done differently to make it better?
• What did you do that you are particularly proud of accomplishing?
• What did you learn from preparing for and delivering this presentation?
• What would you change next time?

Peer Evaluations One way to provide the most feedback for students involves encouraging – or requiring – each student evaluate each other’s presentation. It forces them to watch the presentation both for content and delivery and helps them learn to discriminate between an excellent and an ordinary presentation. The more presentations they observe or watch, the more they learn.

In classes where students are required to deliver presentations, I have students evaluate the presentations they observe using a form I designed. The students in the audience give the evaluation or feedback forms to the presenter as soon as it is over. I do not collect them or review them to encourage honest comments and more direct feedback. Also, students do not use their names when completing the form. That way the presenter gets a picture from all the students in the audience – including me – and cannot discount the comments by recognizing the author.

A version of the form that I use is reproduced below – feel free to adopt or adapt it to your own use and classroom situation.

Professional Evaluations When conducting your professional evaluation of a presentation, remember to consider when and how to deliver oral comments as opposed to a completed form. I complete a written evaluation (shown above) along with all the students so they get some immediate feedback. I also take notes on the presentation and decide a grade as well. After the conclusion of the presentation, whether it was an individual or team presentation, I lead a class discussion on the presentation material. That way, students get to hear some immediate comments as well as reading the written peer evaluations.

I usually ask for a copy of the presentation prior to the delivery date. (Getting the PowerPoint slides ahead also helps me ensure I have all the presentations loaded on the projector or computer so we do not waste class time.) Students either email it to me or place it on our classroom management system. I will provide their letter grade and make comments on the design of the presentation on the copy they gave me. However, I don’t explain the final grade right after the presentation since it is often hard for students who have just made a presentation to hear comments.

Summary Each of these suggestions may prompt you to try your own ideas. Remember that students improve when they receive thoughtful and useful feedback from their peers and you as their teacher. I encourage you to use this form or develop a form so that the criteria used to evaluate the presentations are clear and explained ahead of time. Now, you can enjoy evaluating their presentations.

Dr. Fred Mayo, CHE, CHT, is retired as a clinical professor of hotel and tourism management at New York University. As principal of Mayo Consulting Services, he continues to teach around the globe and is a regular presenter at CAFÉ events nationwide.

This website may not work correctly because your browser is out of date. Please update your browser .

Presentation Preparation Checklist

• https://www.betterevaluation.org/sites/default/files/Presentation-Preparation-Checklist.pdf File type PDF File size 291.29 KB

This checklist from the American Evaluation Association's Potent Presentations Initiative provides a set of guidelines for preparing a presentation. 

The guidelines are set up in the form of a checklist based on preparing your presentation over a period of time.  The first guidelines relate to planning and preparation three months before your presentation and the final guidelines relate to evaluating your performance and building networks.

American Evaluation Association (AEA), Potent Presentation Initiative. (2012).  Presentation preparation checklist . Retrieved from website: http://p2i.eval.org/wp-content/uploads/Presentation-Preparation-Checklist.pdf

Related links

• https://www.betterevaluation.org/sites/default/files/Presentation-Preparation-Checklist.pdf

Back to top

© 2022 BetterEvaluation. All right reserved.

• Twin Cities
• Campus Today
• Directories

University of Minnesota Crookston

• Presidential Search
• Mission, Vision & Values
• Campus Directory
• Campus Maps/Directions
• Transportation and Lodging
• Crookston Community
• Chancellor's Office
• Quick Facts
• Tuition & Costs
• Institutional Effectiveness
• Organizational Chart
• Accreditation
• Strategic Planning
• Awards and Recognition
• Policies & Procedures
• Campus Reporting
• Public Safety
• Admissions Home
• First Year Student
• Transfer Student
• Online Student
• International Student
• Military Veteran Student
• PSEO Student
• More Student Types...
• Financial Aid
• Net Price Calculator
• Cost of Attendance
• Request Info
• Visit Campus
• Admitted Students
• Majors, Minors & Programs
• Agriculture and Natural Resources
• Humanities, Social Sciences, and Education
• Math, Science and Technology
• Teacher Education Unit
• Class Schedules & Registration
• Academic Calendar
• Clubs & Organizations
• Events Calendar
• Student Activities
• Outdoor Equipment Rental
• Intramural & Club Sports
• Wellness Center
• Golden Eagle Athletics
• Health Services
• Career Services
• Counseling Services
• Success Center/Tutoring
• Computer Help Desk
• Scholarships & Aid
• Eagle's Essentials Pantry
• Transportation
• Dining Options
• Residential Life
• Safety & Security
• Crookston & NW Minnesota
• Important Dates & Deadlines
• Teambackers
• Campus News
• Student Dates & Deadlines
• Social Media
• Publications & Archives
• Summer Camps
• Alumni/Donor Awards
• Alumni and Donor Relations

Writing Center

Effective presentations checklist, create a shared meaning between the you, the speaker, and your audience.

Having the knowledge and skills to effectively design and deliver a dynamic presentation is essential in the academic and professional world, regardless of field. Most colleges and universities require students to complete a public speaking course. In addition, many large organizations send employees to training course to develop their skills in this area. Why is it so important for college students and employees to be effective in this context?

The bottom line is that presentations are used to create a  shared meaning  between the speaker and the audience. Whether it is to inform peers of the results of your course project, communicate changes in the organization, provide updates on projects to your boss and co-workers, persuade the organization to invest in new technology, convince the city council to reduce waste, or recognize the accomplishments of a valued employee, the goal of a presentation needs to be accomplished. By using strategic design and delivery techniques, you increase your chances of accomplishing your goal. In addition, your successful efforts will leave others with a positive impression of your communication and leadership skills.

While there are a tremendous number of resources available on the internet to assist individuals wanting to increase the effectiveness of their presentations, the following checklist provides the basic things you should consider. This checklist contains items that are included within UMN Crookston’s Public Speaking course (SPCH 1101).

1. What are the logistical considerations/constraints of the speaking event? 

If you don’t know the answers to the questions below, ask the person inviting you to speak. Although the following is not an exhaustive list, it may help you determine other questions you want to ask:

• What is the occasion/event that I’ll be speaking at (purpose)?
• Where is the presentation located?
• How many people will be in the audience?
• What is the start time for my presentation?
• How much time do I have to speak? Does that include time for questions?
• What should I wear?
• What type of presentation aid would you recommend for this audience
• What technology is available for me to use (screen, projector, computer, etc.)?
• If I have handouts, how many copies should I make?
• Will there be someone available to help if I need assistance with set-up, technology, etc.?

2. Know your audience. 

The more you know about your audience, the more you can tailor your presentation to them, thus making it more relevant and increasing your likelihood of accomplishing your goal. If you don’t know the answers to the questions below, ask the person inviting you to speak. Although the following is not an exhaustive list, it may help you determine other questions you want to ask:

• Who will be in the audience (position, demographics, etc.)?
• How much to the audience know about the presentation topic?
• What is the audience’s overall attitude towards the topic?

3. What is the purpose of the presentation?

The answer to this question will help you determine how to organize your presentation as well as choose the appropriate content. If you don’t know the answers to the questions below, as the person inviting you to speak. Although the following is not an exhaustive list, it may help you determine other questions you want to ask:

• Is the purpose to inform the audience?
• Is the purpose to persuade the audience?
• Is the purpose to deliver a presentation at a special occasion (toast, recognition, award, etc.)?
• Do you have suggestions on what content the presentation should contain?

4. Create a speaking outline with appropriate content.

Creating an outline will help you gather your thoughts and put structure of the content you want to deliver. If your presentation is not organized your audience may have difficulty understanding your content, and you will be less likely to accomplish your goal. Remember that audience members will not have a written manuscript to refer to if they get lost during your presentation. Based on the purpose, constraints, and audience of your presentation, consider including the following items:

Introduction:

• Attention catcher – get their attention with a statement, quote, startling statistic, story, etc.
• Speaker credibility – tell the audience why you are credible to speak on this topic (education experience, interest, etc.).
• Listener relevance statement – tell the audience why this topic is important to them.
• Thesis statement – tell the audience what your presentation is about and what you are trying to accomplish.
• Main points and sub-points – each main point should include information that supports the thesis.
• You may want to include research to support your efforts. If you do include outside research, you need to orally cite it in order to enhance your credibility and give credit to the original sources.
• Each main point should be balanced: i.e. you should spend roughly the same amount of time on each main point.
• Between your main points, you should include transitions that help the listeners understand how the ideas relate to one another.

Conclusion:

• Thesis restatement – remind the audience of your presentation topic and purpose.
• Main point review – remind the audience of your main points (in the order in which they appeared in your presentation).
• Clincher statement – leave the audience with something to think about regarding your presentation.

5. Effectively deliver your presentation. 

Along with content and structure, delivery can either enhance or detract from achieving your goal. We have all attended presentations in which the presenter’s delivery style either enhanced our learning or was so distracting that we stopped listening. The following lists several basic things to consider when delivering your presentation:

• Wear appropriate and comfortable clothing.
• Maintain good eye contact with your audience during at least 90% of your presentation.
• Use the space provided – don’t just stand in one spot.
• Use hand gestures that are appropriate.
• Use your voice and facial expressions.
• Portray confidence.
• Smile when appropriate.
• Eliminate distracting behaviors (repetitive gestures, chewing gum, verbal tics, etc.).
• Don’t just read your speech off of your paper, outline, or note cards; speak in a conversational style.
• Face the audience and not the screen.
• Don’t read off the screen.
• Ensure that your slideshow is visually pleasing – easy to read with few distracting elements.
• Ensure that your slideshow is free from errors.

6. Practice, practice, practice.

An important component of effective presentation delivery is practice. Determine the practice method that works best for you (in front of a mirror, in front of a friend, in the room where you will be delivering your presentation, etc.). Consider practicing several days before delivering your presentation. The more you practice, the more confident you will be with your content, organization, and delivery methods.

7. Dealing with speech anxiety.

Almost everyone experiences some level of speech anxiety when delivering a presentation. Effective presenters are those who use that energy to help them in their efforts. Consider the following when managing your speech anxiety before and/or during your presentation:

• Practice helps lessen speech anxiety.
• Don’t let negative self-talk undermine your efforts. Instead, turn those negative messages – like “I’m going to embarrass myself” or “I’m going to fall” – into positive messages – like “I’m going to be successful” and “I am poised and self-confident.
• Visualize your success.
• Remember to breathe.
• Pretend you’re confident.
• Remember that your audience wants you to be successful.
• Drink water prior to delivering your presentation to avoid a dry mouth/throat.
• Remember that the audience will likely not notice your anxiety.

Whether you are a college student or a working professional, this checklist outlines basic strategies you should consider when designing and delivering an effective presentation. In addition to this checklist, you are encouraged to investigate the many resources and tools in the library and on the internet that can aid you in your efforts. Similar to other skills (athletics, singing, acting, canoeing, etc.), the more experience you have delivering presentations, the more effective you will be.

By Kevin D. Thompson, Ph.D. Last updated October 2016 by Allison Haas, M.A.

How to Evaluate an Oral Presentation

How to Write a Speech Review

Evaluating an oral presentation is not difficult, because every oral presentation has key components that are crucial for the success of the presentation. Just consider the important factors such as confidence, quality, clarity and organization. Not sure exactly how to go about doing this? Read on and learn exactly how to analyze these important factors and come up with the most accurate evaluation possible.

Determine the confidence of the speaker. The speaker should be comfortable and easily connect with the audience. If a speaker acts uncomfortable or nervous, the presentation is not going well. However, if the speaker easily makes eye contact, invites audience participation and puts the audience at ease, this aspect of the presentation is a success.

Determine the quality of the information presented. The speaker should provide enough details to support the point of the presentation but not too many unnecessary details that may confuse or bore the audience.

Determine the level of clarity. The speaker should be easily able to convey the point he is trying to make. Vocabulary should be easy to understand, and all words should be spoken in a clear and fluent manner.

Determine the level of organization. Every presentation should have some sort of structure and organization, whether formal or informal. Simple things such as making sure there is a proper introduction and conclusion can go a long way in making the presentation a success.

• Creating a rubric based on the information in this article might be a useful tool when evaluating oral presentation.
• Don't forget about volume! A speaker could have all of the other aspects of a proper presentation, but it would all be in vain if no one was able to hear it. Make sure the entire audience is able to hear the speaker at all times.

Related Articles

Effective Communication Skills Objectives

How to Summarize a Presentation

How to Explain Technical Concepts

How to Do a Paper Review Presentation

Characteristics of a Good Speech

The Difference Between Effective and Ineffective Listening

How to Write an Introduction to an Analytical Essay

How to Write a Conclusion for PowerPoint Presentation

• Oral Presentation Rubic

Elizabeth Wolfenden has been a professional freelance writer since 2005 with articles published on a variety of blogs and websites. She specializes in the areas of nutrition, health, psychology, mental health and education. Wolfenden holds a bachelor's degree in elementary education and a master's degree in counseling from Oakland University.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Am J Pharm Educ
• v.74(9); 2010 Nov 10

A Standardized Rubric to Evaluate Student Presentations

Michael j. peeters.

a University of Toledo College of Pharmacy

Eric G. Sahloff

Gregory e. stone.

b University of Toledo College of Education

To design, implement, and assess a rubric to evaluate student presentations in a capstone doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) course.

A 20-item rubric was designed and used to evaluate student presentations in a capstone fourth-year course in 2007-2008, and then revised and expanded to 25 items and used to evaluate student presentations for the same course in 2008-2009. Two faculty members evaluated each presentation.

The Many-Facets Rasch Model (MFRM) was used to determine the rubric's reliability, quantify the contribution of evaluator harshness/leniency in scoring, and assess grading validity by comparing the current grading method with a criterion-referenced grading scheme. In 2007-2008, rubric reliability was 0.98, with a separation of 7.1 and 4 rating scale categories. In 2008-2009, MFRM analysis suggested 2 of 98 grades be adjusted to eliminate evaluator leniency, while a further criterion-referenced MFRM analysis suggested 10 of 98 grades should be adjusted.

The evaluation rubric was reliable and evaluator leniency appeared minimal. However, a criterion-referenced re-analysis suggested a need for further revisions to the rubric and evaluation process.

INTRODUCTION

Evaluations are important in the process of teaching and learning. In health professions education, performance-based evaluations are identified as having “an emphasis on testing complex, ‘higher-order’ knowledge and skills in the real-world context in which they are actually used.” 1 Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) are a common, notable example. 2 On Miller's pyramid, a framework used in medical education for measuring learner outcomes, “knows” is placed at the base of the pyramid, followed by “knows how,” then “shows how,” and finally, “does” is placed at the top. 3 Based on Miller's pyramid, evaluation formats that use multiple-choice testing focus on “knows” while an OSCE focuses on “shows how.” Just as performance evaluations remain highly valued in medical education, 4 authentic task evaluations in pharmacy education may be better indicators of future pharmacist performance. 5 Much attention in medical education has been focused on reducing the unreliability of high-stakes evaluations. 6 Regardless of educational discipline, high-stakes performance-based evaluations should meet educational standards for reliability and validity. 7

PharmD students at University of Toledo College of Pharmacy (UTCP) were required to complete a course on presentations during their final year of pharmacy school and then give a presentation that served as both a capstone experience and a performance-based evaluation for the course. Pharmacists attending the presentations were given Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE)-approved continuing education credits. An evaluation rubric for grading the presentations was designed to allow multiple faculty evaluators to objectively score student performances in the domains of presentation delivery and content. Given the pass/fail grading procedure used in advanced pharmacy practice experiences, passing this presentation-based course and subsequently graduating from pharmacy school were contingent upon this high-stakes evaluation. As a result, the reliability and validity of the rubric used and the evaluation process needed to be closely scrutinized.

Each year, about 100 students completed presentations and at least 40 faculty members served as evaluators. With the use of multiple evaluators, a question of evaluator leniency often arose (ie, whether evaluators used the same criteria for evaluating performances or whether some evaluators graded easier or more harshly than others). At UTCP, opinions among some faculty evaluators and many PharmD students implied that evaluator leniency in judging the students' presentations significantly affected specific students' grades and ultimately their graduation from pharmacy school. While it was plausible that evaluator leniency was occurring, the magnitude of the effect was unknown. Thus, this study was initiated partly to address this concern over grading consistency and scoring variability among evaluators.

Because both students' presentation style and content were deemed important, each item of the rubric was weighted the same across delivery and content. However, because there were more categories related to delivery than content, an additional faculty concern was that students feasibly could present poor content but have an effective presentation delivery and pass the course.

The objectives for this investigation were: (1) to describe and optimize the reliability of the evaluation rubric used in this high-stakes evaluation; (2) to identify the contribution and significance of evaluator leniency to evaluation reliability; and (3) to assess the validity of this evaluation rubric within a criterion-referenced grading paradigm focused on both presentation delivery and content.

The University of Toledo's Institutional Review Board approved this investigation. This study investigated performance evaluation data for an oral presentation course for final-year PharmD students from 2 consecutive academic years (2007-2008 and 2008-2009). The course was taken during the fourth year (P4) of the PharmD program and was a high-stakes, performance-based evaluation. The goal of the course was to serve as a capstone experience, enabling students to demonstrate advanced drug literature evaluation and verbal presentations skills through the development and delivery of a 1-hour presentation. These presentations were to be on a current pharmacy practice topic and of sufficient quality for ACPE-approved continuing education. This experience allowed students to demonstrate their competencies in literature searching, literature evaluation, and application of evidence-based medicine, as well as their oral presentation skills. Students worked closely with a faculty advisor to develop their presentation. Each class (2007-2008 and 2008-2009) was randomly divided, with half of the students taking the course and completing their presentation and evaluation in the fall semester and the other half in the spring semester. To accommodate such a large number of students presenting for 1 hour each, it was necessary to use multiple rooms with presentations taking place concurrently over 2.5 days for both the fall and spring sessions of the course. Two faculty members independently evaluated each student presentation using the provided evaluation rubric. The 2007-2008 presentations involved 104 PharmD students and 40 faculty evaluators, while the 2008-2009 presentations involved 98 students and 46 faculty evaluators.

After vetting through the pharmacy practice faculty, the initial rubric used in 2007-2008 focused on describing explicit, specific evaluation criteria such as amounts of eye contact, voice pitch/volume, and descriptions of study methods. The evaluation rubric used in 2008-2009 was similar to the initial rubric, but with 5 items added (Figure ​ (Figure1). 1 ). The evaluators rated each item (eg, eye contact) based on their perception of the student's performance. The 25 rubric items had equal weight (ie, 4 points each), but each item received a rating from the evaluator of 1 to 4 points. Thus, only 4 rating categories were included as has been recommended in the literature. 8 However, some evaluators created an additional 3 rating categories by marking lines in between the 4 ratings to signify half points ie, 1.5, 2.5, and 3.5. For example, for the “notecards/notes” item in Figure ​ Figure1, 1 , a student looked at her notes sporadically during her presentation, but not distractingly nor enough to warrant a score of 3 in the faculty evaluator's opinion, so a 3.5 was given. Thus, a 7-category rating scale (1, 1.5, 2, 2.5. 3, 3.5, and 4) was analyzed. Each independent evaluator's ratings for the 25 items were summed to form a score (0-100%). The 2 evaluators' scores then were averaged and a letter grade was assigned based on the following scale: >90% = A, 80%-89% = B, 70%-79% = C, <70% = F.

Rubric used to evaluate student presentations given in a 2008-2009 capstone PharmD course.

EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT

Rubric reliability.

To measure rubric reliability, iterative analyses were performed on the evaluations using the Many-Facets Rasch Model (MFRM) following the 2007-2008 data collection period. While Cronbach's alpha is the most commonly reported coefficient of reliability, its single number reporting without supplementary information can provide incomplete information about reliability. 9 - 11 Due to its formula, Cronbach's alpha can be increased by simply adding more repetitive rubric items or having more rating scale categories, even when no further useful information has been added. The MFRM reports separation , which is calculated differently than Cronbach's alpha, is another source of reliability information. Unlike Cronbach's alpha, separation does not appear enhanced by adding further redundant items. From a measurement perspective, a higher separation value is better than a lower one because students are being divided into meaningful groups after measurement error has been accounted for. Separation can be thought of as the number of units on a ruler where the more units the ruler has, the larger the range of performance levels that can be measured among students. For example, a separation of 4.0 suggests 4 graduations such that a grade of A is distinctly different from a grade of B, which in turn is different from a grade of C or of F. In measuring performances, a separation of 9.0 is better than 5.5, just as a separation of 7.0 is better than a 6.5; a higher separation coefficient suggests that student performance potentially could be divided into a larger number of meaningfully separate groups.

The rating scale can have substantial effects on reliability, 8 while description of how a rating scale functions is a unique aspect of the MFRM. With analysis iterations of the 2007-2008 data, the number of rating scale categories were collapsed consecutively until improvements in reliability and/or separation were no longer found. The last positive iteration that led to positive improvements in reliability or separation was deemed an optimal rating scale for this evaluation rubric.

In the 2007-2008 analysis, iterations of the data where run through the MFRM. While only 4 rating scale categories had been included on the rubric, because some faculty members inserted 3 in-between categories, 7 categories had to be included in the analysis. This initial analysis based on a 7-category rubric provided a reliability coefficient (similar to Cronbach's alpha) of 0.98, while the separation coefficient was 6.31. The separation coefficient denoted 6 distinctly separate groups of students based on the items. Rating scale categories were collapsed, with “in-between” categories included in adjacent full-point categories. Table ​ Table1 1 shows the reliability and separation for the iterations as the rating scale was collapsed. As shown, the optimal evaluation rubric maintained a reliability of 0.98, but separation improved the reliability to 7.10 or 7 distinctly separate groups of students based on the items. Another distinctly separate group was added through a reduction in the rating scale while no change was seen to Cronbach's alpha, even though the number of rating scale categories was reduced. Table ​ Table1 1 describes the stepwise, sequential pattern across the final 4 rating scale categories analyzed. Informed by the 2007-2008 results, the 2008-2009 evaluation rubric (Figure ​ (Figure1) 1 ) used 4 rating scale categories and reliability remained high.

Evaluation Rubric Reliability and Separation with Iterations While Collapsing Rating Scale Categories.

a Reliability coefficient of variance in rater response that is reproducible (ie, Cronbach's alpha).

b Separation is a coefficient of item standard deviation divided by average measurement error and is an additional reliability coefficient.

c Optimal number of rating scale categories based on the highest reliability (0.98) and separation (7.1) values.

Evaluator Leniency

Described by Fleming and colleagues over half a century ago, 6 harsh raters (ie, hawks) or lenient raters (ie, doves) have also been demonstrated in more recent studies as an issue as well. 12 - 14 Shortly after 2008-2009 data were collected, those evaluations by multiple faculty evaluators were collated and analyzed in the MFRM to identify possible inconsistent scoring. While traditional interrater reliability does not deal with this issue, the MFRM had been used previously to illustrate evaluator leniency on licensing examinations for medical students and medical residents in the United Kingdom. 13 Thus, accounting for evaluator leniency may prove important to grading consistency (and reliability) in a course using multiple evaluators. Along with identifying evaluator leniency, the MFRM also corrected for this variability. For comparison, course grades were calculated by summing the evaluators' actual ratings (as discussed in the Design section) and compared with the MFRM-adjusted grades to quantify the degree of evaluator leniency occurring in this evaluation.

Measures created from the data analysis in the MFRM were converted to percentages using a common linear test-equating procedure involving the mean and standard deviation of the dataset. 15 To these percentages, student letter grades were assigned using the same traditional method used in 2007-2008 (ie, 90% = A, 80% - 89% = B, 70% - 79% = C, <70% = F). Letter grades calculated using the revised rubric and the MFRM then were compared to letter grades calculated using the previous rubric and course grading method.

In the analysis of the 2008-2009 data, the interrater reliability for the letter grades when comparing the 2 independent faculty evaluations for each presentation was 0.98 by Cohen's kappa. However, using the 3-facet MRFM revealed significant variation in grading. The interaction of evaluator leniency on student ability and item difficulty was significant, with a chi-square of p < 0.01. As well, the MFRM showed a reliability of 0.77, with a separation of 1.85 (ie, almost 2 groups of evaluators). The MFRM student ability measures were scaled to letter grades and compared with course letter grades. As a result, 2 B's became A's and so evaluator leniency accounted for a 2% change in letter grades (ie, 2 of 98 grades).

Validity and Grading

Explicit criterion-referenced standards for grading are recommended for higher evaluation validity. 3 , 16 - 18 The course coordinator completed 3 additional evaluations of a hypothetical student presentation rating the minimal criteria expected to describe each of an A, B, or C letter grade performance. These evaluations were placed with the other 196 evaluations (2 evaluators × 98 students) from 2008-2009 into the MFRM, with the resulting analysis report giving specific cutoff percentage scores for each letter grade. Unlike the traditional scoring method of assigning all items an equal weight, the MFRM ordered evaluation items from those more difficult for students (given more weight) to those less difficult for students (given less weight). These criterion-referenced letter grades were compared with the grades generated using the traditional grading process.

When the MFRM data were rerun with the criterion-referenced evaluations added into the dataset, a 10% change was seen with letter grades (ie, 10 of 98 grades). When the 10 letter grades were lowered, 1 was below a C, the minimum standard, and suggested a failing performance. Qualitative feedback from faculty evaluators agreed with this suggested criterion-referenced performance failure.

Measurement Model

Within modern test theory, the Rasch Measurement Model maps examinee ability with evaluation item difficulty. Items are not arbitrarily given the same value (ie, 1 point) but vary based on how difficult or easy the items were for examinees. The Rasch measurement model has been used frequently in educational research, 19 by numerous high-stakes testing professional bodies such as the National Board of Medical Examiners, 20 and also by various state-level departments of education for standardized secondary education examinations. 21 The Rasch measurement model itself has rigorous construct validity and reliability. 22 A 3-facet MFRM model allows an evaluator variable to be added to the student ability and item difficulty variables that are routine in other Rasch measurement analyses. Just as multiple regression accounts for additional variables in analysis compared to a simple bivariate regression, the MFRM is a multiple variable variant of the Rasch measurement model and was applied in this study using the Facets software (Linacre, Chicago, IL). The MFRM is ideal for performance-based evaluations with the addition of independent evaluator/judges. 8 , 23 From both yearly cohorts in this investigation, evaluation rubric data were collated and placed into the MFRM for separate though subsequent analyses. Within the MFRM output report, a chi-square for a difference in evaluator leniency was reported with an alpha of 0.05.

The presentation rubric was reliable. Results from the 2007-2008 analysis illustrated that the number of rating scale categories impacted the reliability of this rubric and that use of only 4 rating scale categories appeared best for measurement. While a 10-point Likert-like scale may commonly be used in patient care settings, such as in quantifying pain, most people cannot process more then 7 points or categories reliably. 24 Presumably, when more than 7 categories are used, the categories beyond 7 either are not used or are collapsed by respondents into fewer than 7 categories. Five-point scales commonly are encountered, but use of an odd number of categories can be problematic to interpretation and is not recommended. 25 Responses using the middle category could denote a true perceived average or neutral response or responder indecisiveness or even confusion over the question. Therefore, removing the middle category appears advantageous and is supported by our results.

With 2008-2009 data, the MFRM identified evaluator leniency with some evaluators grading more harshly while others were lenient. Evaluator leniency was indeed found in the dataset but only a couple of changes were suggested based on the MFRM-corrected evaluator leniency and did not appear to play a substantial role in the evaluation of this course at this time.

Performance evaluation instruments are either holistic or analytic rubrics. 26 The evaluation instrument used in this investigation exemplified an analytic rubric, which elicits specific observations and often demonstrates high reliability. However, Norman and colleagues point out a conundrum where drastically increasing the number of evaluation rubric items (creating something similar to a checklist) could augment a reliability coefficient though it appears to dissociate from that evaluation rubric's validity. 27 Validity may be more than the sum of behaviors on evaluation rubric items. 28 Having numerous, highly specific evaluation items appears to undermine the rubric's function. With this investigation's evaluation rubric and its numerous items for both presentation style and presentation content, equal numeric weighting of items can in fact allow student presentations to receive a passing score while falling short of the course objectives, as was shown in the present investigation. As opposed to analytic rubrics, holistic rubrics often demonstrate lower yet acceptable reliability, while offering a higher degree of explicit connection to course objectives. A summative, holistic evaluation of presentations may improve validity by allowing expert evaluators to provide their “gut feeling” as experts on whether a performance is “outstanding,” “sufficient,” “borderline,” or “subpar” for dimensions of presentation delivery and content. A holistic rubric that integrates with criteria of the analytic rubric (Figure ​ (Figure1) 1 ) for evaluators to reflect on but maintains a summary, overall evaluation for each dimension (delivery/content) of the performance, may allow for benefits of each type of rubric to be used advantageously. This finding has been demonstrated with OSCEs in medical education where checklists for completed items (ie, yes/no) at an OSCE station have been successfully replaced with a few reliable global impression rating scales. 29 - 31

Alternatively, and because the MFRM model was used in the current study, an items-weighting approach could be used with the analytic rubric. That is, item weighting based on the difficulty of each rubric item could suggest how many points should be given for that rubric items, eg, some items would be worth 0.25 points, while others would be worth 0.5 points or 1 point (Table ​ (Table2). 2 ). As could be expected, the more complex the rubric scoring becomes, the less feasible the rubric is to use. This was the main reason why this revision approach was not chosen by the course coordinator following this study. As well, it does not address the conundrum that the performance may be more than the summation of behavior items in the Figure ​ Figure1 1 rubric. This current study cannot suggest which approach would be better as each would have its merits and pitfalls.

Rubric Item Weightings Suggested in the 2008-2009 Data Many-Facet Rasch Measurement Analysis

Regardless of which approach is used, alignment of the evaluation rubric with the course objectives is imperative. Objectivity has been described as a general striving for value-free measurement (ie, free of the evaluator's interests, opinions, preferences, sentiments). 27 This is a laudable goal pursued through educational research. Strategies to reduce measurement error, termed objectification , may not necessarily lead to increased objectivity. 27 The current investigation suggested that a rubric could become too explicit if all the possible areas of an oral presentation that could be assessed (ie, objectification) were included. This appeared to dilute the effect of important items and lose validity. A holistic rubric that is more straightforward and easier to score quickly may be less likely to lose validity (ie, “lose the forest for the trees”), though operationalizing a revised rubric would need to be investigated further. Similarly, weighting items in an analytic rubric based on their importance and difficulty for students may alleviate this issue; however, adding up individual items might prove arduous. While the rubric in Figure ​ Figure1, 1 , which has evolved over the years, is the subject of ongoing revisions, it appears a reliable rubric on which to build.

The major limitation of this study involves the observational method that was employed. Although the 2 cohorts were from a single institution, investigators did use a completely separate class of PharmD students to verify initial instrument revisions. Optimizing the rubric's rating scale involved collapsing data from misuse of a 4-category rating scale (expanded by evaluators to 7 categories) by a few of the evaluators into 4 independent categories without middle ratings. As a result of the study findings, no actual grading adjustments were made for students in the 2008-2009 presentation course; however, adjustment using the MFRM have been suggested by Roberts and colleagues. 13 Since 2008-2009, the course coordinator has made further small revisions to the rubric based on feedback from evaluators, but these have not yet been re-analyzed with the MFRM.

The evaluation rubric used in this study for student performance evaluations showed high reliability and the data analysis agreed with using 4 rating scale categories to optimize the rubric's reliability. While lenient and harsh faculty evaluators were found, variability in evaluator scoring affected grading in this course only minimally. Aside from reliability, issues of validity were raised using criterion-referenced grading. Future revisions to this evaluation rubric should reflect these criterion-referenced concerns. The rubric analyzed herein appears a suitable starting point for reliable evaluation of PharmD oral presentations, though it has limitations that could be addressed with further attention and revisions.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Author contributions— MJP and EGS conceptualized the study, while MJP and GES designed it. MJP, EGS, and GES gave educational content foci for the rubric. As the study statistician, MJP analyzed and interpreted the study data. MJP reviewed the literature and drafted a manuscript. EGS and GES critically reviewed this manuscript and approved the final version for submission. MJP accepts overall responsibility for the accuracy of the data, its analysis, and this report.

RUBRIC FOR A PERSUASIVE PRESENTATION

Dr. elise gold (engineering).

Below you will find the various criteria used to evaluate your presentation along with categories describing your performance in these areas. The boxes highlighted indicate your overall performance in the broader areas as described. Items specifically needing work may be underlined. Along with a grade, an overall evaluation follows, with a few major suggestions for improvement.

GRADE: _________

(Points lost for not showing up for presentation, not submitting copy of presentation outline, notes, and handout copy of slides on day of presentation for not being present to serve as a peer=s assigned questioner? __________)

OVERALL EVALUATION:

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

EVALUATING AN ORAL PRESENTATION

Related Papers

Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education

Asko Mononen

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to design a rubric instrument for assessing oral presentation performance in higher education and to test its validity with an expert group. Design/methodology/approach This study, using mixed methods, focusses on: designing a rubric by identifying assessment instruments in previous presentation research and implementing essential design characteristics in a preliminary developed rubric; and testing the validity of the constructed instrument with an expert group of higher educational professionals (n=38). Findings The result of this study is a validated rubric instrument consisting of 11 presentation criteria, their related levels in performance, and a five-point scoring scale. These adopted criteria correspond to the widely accepted main criteria for presentations, in both literature and educational practice, regarding aspects as content of the presentation, structure of the presentation, interaction with the audience and presentation delivery. ...

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

luc de grez

Ileana Oana Macari

The paper describes a constructivist-inspired framework used for the assessment of the oral presentations that English minor 2nd year students complete in groups as the end-of-term TPL course assignment in the first semester. This kind of integrated evaluation using peer, self, and instructor assessment has great pedagogical value, because it engages students and teachers as responsible partners in learning and assessment. Keywords: constructivism, oral presentation, portfolio, authentic assessment

Mohammad Salehi

Vikram Koundinya

International Journal of Instruction

Omer Mahfoodh

Abdelrahman elhaj

International Educational Research

enceng yana

International Journal of Learning and Teaching

Rizaldy Hanifa

The importance of being able to perform a good oral presentation is undeniably necessary for academician nowadays, including students of higher education. To show their capacity, the students need to be prepared in delivering their presentation. However, the current students' presentation skill is still far from the expectation. Therefore, this article aims at sharing several facts dealing with presentation skill in terms of preparations, problems faced during presentation, and the ways to cope with the problems. This study was conducted as a qualitative research with descriptive approach. Questionnaire and interview were distributed and performed to five respondents to gather the data needed. The findings show that preparation involving content mastery and practice are the keys to be successful in presentation. Meanwhile, the problems faced are highly related to the respondents' nervousness due to time limitation and audiences, which cause losing idea while performing. To overcome these, some strategies such as believing in their abilities, skipping less important points, and anticipating possible questions from the audiences were employed. Based on the research results, it is suggested that speaker should be trained to be more aware of the preparations and strategies needed for presentation since the main keys to the success of delivering good presentation are highly determined by knowing how to prepare well and being able to use the strategies more appropriately and frequently.

Active Learning in Higher Education

Assessment of oral presentation skills is an underexplored area. The study described here focuses on the agreement between professional assessment and self- and peer assessment of oral presentation skills and explores student perceptions about peer assessment. The study has the merit of paying attention to the inter-rater reliability of the teachers. Comparison of the teacher and peer assessment rubric scores

RELATED PAPERS

caiofluzao costa

International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism

Caroline Sunderland

Jordi de San Eugenio Vela

Gobinda bal

Justyna Trzepizur

Liver Transplantation - Basic Issues

Meral Kanbak

RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics

Zifa Temirgazina , Atirkul Agmanova

Antonio Manuel

Micha Salomon

Proceedings for Annual Meeting of The Japanese Pharmacological Society

Catherine Opere

Constanza Mackrey

Physical Review A

Svante Svensson

Forest Ecology and Management

Elena Marcos

Renewable Energy and Power Quality Journal

Francisco Ruz

International Journal of Research in Engineering and Science

Journal of Clinical Medicine

concetta ambrosino

HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)

genevieve lucet

日本薬理学会年会要旨集 =

Graciela Russomando

Martin Dinter

Ilie Rotariu

Abdelkader Chaari

Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries

Ashok Dastidar

International Journal of Learning and Development

Kashif Kazmi

Mahaguru: Jurnal Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar 

Khairul Azmi

Ozgur Altay

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Creating a Poster

• Getting Started
• Design Tips
• PowerPoint Set-Up & Templates
• USD Info: Logo, Tips, Printing

Evaluation Checklist

Evaluation tools & summaries, class exercises-1, class exercises-2, class handout.

• Presenting Your Poster
• Additional Reading & Research

Poster Evaluation Checklist

o  Title and other required sections are present

o  Complete author affiliation & contact information is included

o  The poster conforms to the requirements of the conference or program where it will be presented

o  Font is consistent throughout

o  Spelling is correct throughout

o  Grammar is correct throughout

o  Acronyms are defined on first use

o  Content is appropriate & relevant for audience

o  All text can be easily read from 4 feet away

o  Flow of the poster is easy to follow

o  White space used well

o  Section titles are used consistently

o  Images/graphics are used in place of text whenever possible

o  Bullet points/lists are used in place of text whenever possible

o  All images are relevant and necessary to the poster

o  Charts are correct – i.e. appropriate type for data, data is correct & correctly represented

o  Text color and background color are significant in contrast for easy reading

o  Background color doesn’t obscure or dim text

o  Images are clear, not pixilated or blurry

o  The “story” of the poster is clear

o  The content is focused on 2-3 key points

o  Title is clear & informative of the project

o  Problem, or clinical question, is identified and explained

o  Current evidence related to project is listed

o  Objectives are stated

o  Methods are described

o  Results are presented

o  Conclusions are stated

o  Implications to practice and to other professions are presented

o  References are listed

o  All content is relevant and on the key points

o  Content is not duplicated in text and graphics

Oral Presentation

o  Presenter greets people

o  Presenter is able to give a concise synopsis of poster

o  Presenter is able to explain all diagrams and sections

o  Presenter speaks fluently – i.e. doesn’t stumble, leave sentences/thoughts hanging

o  Presenter has questions to ask viewers

The following links are to surveys & rubrics with questions you can use to critique & improve your poster

• 60-second Poster Evaluation  (by G. Hess) Provides 9 categories with a ranking from 0-2
• Poster Evaluation Rubric (adapted from Hess) Chart format of Hess' evaluation
• Research Poster Evaluation Rubric (by CSEE) Includes evaluation of poster content, not just graphics & design
• Creating effective scholarly posters: A guide for DNP students . (USD only) Discusses poster presentations as an excellent venue for students to successfully share the results of their scholarly projects; includes an evaluation rubric. Christenbery, T. (2013). Creating effective scholarly posters: A guide for DNP students. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners., 25(1), 16-23.

As an exercise, apply the criteria in the poster evaluation checksheet on the back of your handout to the examples on this page. Complete an evaluation for your assigned poster. 

The following examples illustrate issues with  content ,  design and layout , and  graphics .

• Can Suburban Greenways Provide High Quality Bird Habitat? https://www.ncsu.edu/project/posters/examples/BirdsInGreenways/BirdsInGreenways.jpg  
• Will Manatees Still Exist in 2100? https://www.ncsu.edu/project/posters/examples/Manatees/Manatees.jpg  
• Gene Flow in Lions https://www.ncsu.edu/project/posters/examples/GeneFlowInLions/GeneFlowInLions.jpg

As an exercise, apply the criteria in the poster evaluation checksheet on the back of your handout to the examples on this page. Complete an evaluation for each example, then compare your evaluation with ours. 

The following examples illustrate issues with  content ,  design and layout ,  graphics , and an  overall example .  Each includes a version needing improvement, and a revised version of the same poster. 

1. Content Example

http://lgimages.s3.amazonaws.com/data/imagemanager/25128/contextexample-first.jpg

2. Design and Layout Example

http://lgimages.s3.amazonaws.com/data/imagemanager/25128/designlayoutex-first.jpg

3. Graphics Example

http://lgimages.s3.amazonaws.com/data/imagemanager/25128/graphicsexample-firstversion.jpg

4. Overall Design Example

http://lgimages.s3.amazonaws.com/data/imagemanager/25128/overallexample-first.jpg

• Handout 10.27.2014
• << Previous: USD Info: Logo, Tips, Printing
• Next: Presenting Your Poster >>
• Last Updated: Nov 6, 2023 10:01 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usd.edu/poster

You have unlimited possibilities for success at Tennessee State University. We're a leading institution of higher learning and provide students with the opportunity to experience academic and personal growth. Through our eight colleges and schools, we offer 45 bachelor's degrees, 24 master's degrees and seven doctorate degrees. You'll receive instruction from top-notch faculty and be immersed in research, service learning and student life activities, including internships, cultural and study abroad opportunities.

Our world-class faculty will teach you how to apply what you learn in the classroom to real-world situations. As a student, you will become a problem solver and critical thinker. You may begin the admissions process by submitting your application. The university also assists in providing information on financial aid services, work-study, fellowships and scholarships based on eligibility and other rules and regulations established by the agencies.

Tennessee State University is committed to excellence and has been consistently listed in the U.S. News & World Report's "Guide to America's Best Colleges" for more than a decade. Founded in 1912, TSU is a comprehensive, urban, co-educational, land-grant institution in Nashville, Tennessee. The university has been served by seven presidents, including Dr. Glenda Baskin Glover, who is currently serving as our eighth president.

Tennessee State University students are go by the motto: "Think. Work. Serve." But we also realize a little fun should be part of the collegiate experience to create a holistic approach to learning. With a variety of social, professional and civic clubs for students to participate in, there are many opportunities for you to share your time and talents and enjoy connecting with your fellow students to create the work/life balance needed for success in college and beyond.

Tennessee State University counts on the generous contributions of alumni and friends to fulfill our mission of providing a top-notch, affordable education to the best and brightest students. Every gift, no matter the size, makes a difference. When you support TSU, you help provide critically needed scholarships, departmental support and other special project funding that benefits our students.

Tennessee State University is engaging in cutting-edge research to address critical challenges in our society. Our research arm supports faculty and students by taking their ideas from conception to fruition in critical areas such as biotechnology, homeland security and agriculture, to name a few. Our Centers of Excellence encourage collaborative and experimental learning opportunities and help expand the boundaries of science, education and technology.

Tennessee State University Athletics is part of the Ohio Valley Conference (OVC) NCAA Division ? and offers football, men's basketball, women's basketball, track and field, golf, tennis, softball and volleyball. We provide student-athletes with a positive academic and social environment to excel on and off the field. Our mission is to blend physical, emotional and intellectual development into one experience. We not only build winning-teams, but leaders in the classroom, in the community and in your profession of choice.

Tennessee State University is a world-class university known for academic excellence, incredible students, inspiring faculty, exceptional value and an amazing campus and community. We invite you to learn more about TSU and our academic programs, admissions process, tuition and financial aid, campus visits, student housing and more.

Tennessee State University is dedicated to helping students develop the skills needed for the real world. Our vibrant campus life, leadership opportunities, rigorous academic programs, access to scholarships and student services are just a few of the student services we offer. We are preparing career-ready professionals today for knowledge-based jobs tomorrow. The Tiger legacy continues with you.

TSU loves parents! And we encourage you to stay involved with your Tennessee State University student. We strive to make the transition to college and beyond flow as smoothly as possible for everyone. We'll keep you up-to-date on campus happenings through a monthly eNewsletter, a helpful Parent Guide and through many other programs and events. We're here to help you and your student make the most out of your TSU experience.

At Tennessee State University, our blood runs blue! We enjoy connecting, socializing and sharing news about the great things our alumni are doing across the globe. From our annual Homecoming celebration to donor events and volunteer activities, TSU alumni always find time to celebrate what it means to be a Big Blue Tiger. We welcome you back to campus anytime to rekindle your most memorable experiences.

Welcome to Tennessee State University, located in the heart of one of the nation's most progressive cities! Whether you are here for your first visit, planning a campus tour or returning after many years away, TSU welcomes you to enjoy our facilities, hospitality and our unique history and contributions.

Tennessee State University is proud to have 1,200 distinguished administrators, faculty and staff members as part of our team. With outstanding reputations for teaching, research and service, these professionals make valuable contributions to our community of scholars and ensure that TSU is a thriving public institution of higher learning.

Oops! We can't find that page.

Maybe you can find what you're looking for via:

• the Search Box in the upper right (where you can search for any term, name, etc.),

the main menu,

these links:

Centennial (the Centennial site has been archived to the Library)

Food Safety for Older Adults

Looking for another department?

Please browse our website using the top menus in order to find the department or information you need or use the links below:

Academic Departments

Administrative/Operational Departments

or the Phone/Email Directory

NTRS - NASA Technical Reports Server

Available downloads, related records.