Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
DEBATEGRADINGRUBRIC
DEBATEGRADINGRUBRIC
Ontherightsideoftherubric,pleasewritethenumberrepresentingwhatyouthinkwastheperformancelevelofthedebateteamin
questionforeachcriterionbelow.Thencalculatetheaverageforeachteam.
LevelsofPerformanceforAFFIRMATIVETeam
Criteria
1.Organization&
Clarity:
Grade:
Completelyclear
andorderly
presentation
Mostlyclearand
orderlyinall
parts
Clearinsome
partsbutnot
overall
Unclearand
disorganized
throughout
Verystrongand
persuasive
argumentsgiven
throughout
Manygood
argumentsgiven,
withonlyminor
problems
Somedecent
arguments,but
somesignificant
problems
Fewornoreal
argumentsgiven,or
allargumentsgiven
hadsignificant
problems
Excellentcross
examanddefense
againstNegative
teamsobjections
Goodcrossexam
andrebuttals,
withonlyminor
slipups
Decentcross
examand/or
rebuttals,but
withsome
significant
problems
Poorcrossexamor
rebuttals,failureto
pointoutproblems
inNegativeteams
positionorfailure
todefenditself
againstattack.
Allstylefeatures
wereused
convincingly
Moststyle
featureswere
used
convincingly
Fewstyle
featureswere
used
convincingly
Veryfewstyle
featureswereused,
noneofthem
convincingly
TOTAL
SCORE:
Mainargumentsand
responsesareoutlinedin
aclearandorderlyway.
2.Useof
Argument:
Reasonsaregivento
supporttheresolution
3.Useofcross
examinationand
rebuttal:
Identificationof
weaknessinNegative
teamsargumentsand
abilitytodefenditself
againstattack.
4.Presentation
Style:
Toneofvoice,clarityof
expression,precisionof
argumentsallcontribute
tokeepingaudiences
attentionandpersuading
themoftheteamscase.
_____
(Divideby4)
AVERAGEFORAFFIRMATIVETEAM:_______
LevelsofPerformanceforNEGATIVETeam
Criteria
1.Organization&
Clarity:
Completelyclear
andorderly
presentation
Mostlyclearand
orderlyinall
parts
http://www.csun.edu/~ds56723/phil338/hout338rubric.htm
2
Clearinsome
partsbutnot
overall
1
Unclearand
disorganized
throughout
Grade:
1/2
18/11/2016
DEBATEGRADINGRUBRIC
Mainargumentsand
responsesareoutlinedin
aclearandorderlyway.
2.Useof
Argument:
Reasonsaregiven
againsttheresolution
3.Useofcross
examinationand
rebuttal:
Identificationof
weaknessinAffirmative
teamsargumentsand
abilitytodefenditself
againstattack.
4.Presentation
Style:
Verystrongand
persuasive
argumentsgiven
throughout
Manygood
argumentsgiven,
withonlyminor
problems
Somedecent
arguments,but
somesignificant
problems
Fewornoreal
argumentsgiven,or
allargumentsgiven
hadsignificant
problems
Excellentcross
examanddefense
against
Affirmative
teamsobjections
Goodcrossexam
andrebuttal,with
onlyminorslip
ups
Decentcross
examand/or
rebuttal,butwith
somesignificant
problems
Poorcrossexamor
rebuttal,failureto
pointoutproblems
inAffirmative
teamspositionor
failuretodefend
itselfagainstattack.
Allstylefeatures
wereused
convincingly
Moststyle
featureswere
used
convincingly
Fewstyle
featureswere
used
convincingly
Veryfewstyle
featureswereused,
noneofthem
convincingly
TOTAL
SCORE:
Toneofvoice,clarityof
expression,precisionof
argumentsallcontribute
tokeepingaudiences
attentionandpersuading
themoftheteamscase.
_______
(Divideby4)
AVERAGEFORNEGATIVETEAM:_______
STUDENTNUMBER(toremainconfidential):_______________________________
http://www.csun.edu/~ds56723/phil338/hout338rubric.htm
2/2