IB Seminar Discussion Rubric (Speaking, Listening, Contributing)

Criteria
Community &
Contribution*: Listens
actively and speaks
clearly, responding
thoughtfully to diverse
perspectives in ways that
support listeners in
following the thread of
the conversation; jots
down ideas to follow
along in the conversation
and not interrupt until it
is their turn
Argumentation*:
Supports claims with
warranted evidence from
multiple sources to
stimulate a thoughtful,
well-reasoned exchange
of ideas
Knowledge*: Uses
discipline specific
vocabulary (when
appropriate) and syntax
and explicit textual
references so that others
can understand and
critique the arguments
under discussion

Assessed Monthly

5-Exemplary

Listens carefully with alert posture, tracking each

speaker. Monitors participation so that he/she
listens more than speaks.

Speaks loudly and slowly enough for all to

understand. Makes effective use of eye contact.

Responds to specific contributions by restating

and building on others ideasproviding reasons
for (dis)agreeing, asks follow-up questions,
synthesizes peers ideas

4-Accomplished

Listens with alert posture, tracking

speaker. Listens more than speaks.

Speaks loudly and slowly enough

for all to understand. Makes eye
contact.

Responds to specific contributions

by restating and building on
others ideasproviding reasons
for (dis)agreeing, asks follow-up
questions, synthesizes peers ideas

Offers clear, relevant claims that fuel the

discussion.
Supports and challenges claims using multiple
pieces of evidence.
Uses clear reasoning to explain clearly the
connection between claims and evidence.

Uses academic language to clearly communicate

ideas. When necessary, defines abstract concepts
(i.e. love, justice) by establishing clear criteria and
offering (counter) examples.
Explicitly references relevant facts, written texts,
or other information. Orients listeners to location
and context of excerpts or features, and waits for
listeners to locate.
Makes relevant, logical connections between text
under discussion and multiple other knowledge
sources (other texts, historical contexts, personal
experience, previous classes, etc.)
Clearly prepared with notes, annotations, and
ideas from previous nights reading.

Inquiry*: Formulates
higher-level thinking
questions that help
others think more deeply
about the text; poses
those and follow-up
questions to help clarify,
and is open to more
ideas than their own.

Has prepared and poses thought-provoking

questions that require knowledge and
understanding to discuss
Has an idea of answer to question, but considers
others ideas and opinions even if they pose the
question
Examines ideas and text through multiple lenses

Offers clear, relevant claims.

Supports claims using multiple
pieces of evidence.
Uses clear reasoning to explain the
connection between claims and
evidence.
Uses academic language to
communicate ideas. When
necessary, defines abstract
concepts (i.e. love, justice) by
establishing criteria and offering
(counter) examples.
References relevant facts, written
texts, or other information. Orients
listeners to location and context of
excerpts or features.
Makes connections between text
under discussion and multiple
other knowledge sources (other
texts, historical contexts, personal
experience, previous classes, etc.)
Prepared with notes, annotations,
and ideas from previous nights
reading.
Poses thought-provoking questions
that require knowledge and
understanding to discuss
Has an idea of answer to question,
but mostly considers others ideas
and opinions even if they pose the
question
Examines ideas and text through
multiple lenses

3-Satisfactory

Attempts to listen with focused

posture and track speakers.
Sometimes needs prompting to
speak or speaks so that others do
not have a chance.

Speaks loudly for most to

understand. Looks in the general
direction of speakers and whom
they are speaking to.

Attempts to restate and build on

others ideasproviding reasons
for (dis)agreeing, asks follow-up
questions, synthesizes peers ideas

With prompting, attempts to offer

claims that are clear and relevant.

Attempts to support with

evidence, but it may not always be
relevant or accurate.

Attempts to explain reasoning

behind claims.

Attempts to, or with prompting,

use academic language to
communicate ideas.

References mostly relevant facts,

written texts, or other information.

Tries to make connections

between text under discussion and
multiple other knowledge sources
(other texts, historical contexts,
personal experience, previous
classes, etc.)

Prepared with notes, annotations,

and ideas from previous nights
reading.

2-Developing (0-not attempted)

With prompting, can be reminded

to have a focused posture and
listen, but often gets distracted, or
even distracts others.

Speaks only when told to speak, or

speaks over others.

Speaks softly so that others have a

difficult time hearing; very little
eye contact.

Consistently uses the written

supplement option for seminar
discussions and therefore peers do
not gain insight from them.

Claims may be vague, confusing, or

irrelevant.

Rarely supports using evidence.

Explanations may be vague,

confusing, or irrelevant.

Poses questions that require

knowledge and understanding to
discuss, but some may be too
easy
Has an idea of answer to question,
but sometimes considers others
ideas and opinions
Examines ideas and text through
multiple lenses

Rarely uses academic language to

communicate ideas.
Rarely references relevant facts or
other information.
Does not make connections
between any other resources aside
from text as written.
Rarely comes prepared with notes
or may even not have read in order
to participate.

Rarely poses questions that are

higher-level (mostly obvious
answers that one would know
simply by having read the words
on the paper)
Closed-minded when considering
others responses to their own
questions

**Categories can be supplemented by written responses. However, keep in mind that Community & Contribution cannot be supplemented, and if you are only listening and not contributing on a regular basis, your
discussion grade cannot ever be higher than a 15/20.