Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

Levels of Performance for AFFIRMATIVE Team

Criteria 4 3 2 1 Grade:
1. Organization & Completely Mostly clear Clear in some Unclear and
Clarity: clear and and orderly in parts but not disorganized
orderly all parts overall throughout
presentation
Main arguments and
responses are outlined
in a clear and orderly
way.
2. Use of Very strong Many good Some decent Few or no real
Argument: and persuasive arguments arguments, but arguments given,
arguments given, with some or all arguments
given only minor significant given had
Reasons are given to throughout problems problems significant
support the resolution problems
3. Use of cross- Excellent Good cross- Decent cross- Poor cross-exam
examination and cross-exam exam and exam and/or or rebuttals,
and defense rebuttals, with rebuttals, but failure to point
rebuttal: against only minor with some out problems in
Negative slip-ups significant Negative team’s
Identification of team’s problems position or
weakness in Negative objections failure to defend
team’s arguments and itself against
ability to defend itself attack.
against attack.
4. Presentation All style Most style Few style Very few style
Style: features were features were features were features were
used used used used, none of
convincingly convincingly convincingly them
Tone of voice, clarity convincingly
of expression,
precision of arguments
all contribute to
keeping audience’s
attention and
persuading them of the
team’s case.
TOTAL
SCORE:

_____

(Divide by 4)

AVERAGE FOR AFFIRMATIVE


TEAM: _______
Levels of Performance for NEGATIVE Team

Criteria 4 3 2 1 Grade:
1. Organization & Completely Mostly clear Clear in some Unclear and
Clarity: clear and and orderly in parts but not disorganized
orderly all parts overall throughout
presentation
Main arguments and
responses are outlined
in a clear and orderly
way.
2. Use of Very strong Many good Some decent Few or no real
Argument: and persuasive arguments arguments, but arguments given,
arguments given, with some or all arguments
given only minor significant given had
Reasons are given throughout problems problems significant
against the resolution problems
3. Use of cross- Excellent Good cross- Decent cross- Poor cross-exam
examination and cross-exam exam and exam and/or or rebuttal,
and defense rebuttal, with rebuttal, but failure to point
rebuttal: against only minor with some out problems in
Affirmative slip-ups significant Affirmative
Identification of team’s problems team’s position
weakness in objections or failure to
Affirmative team’s defend itself
arguments and ability against attack.
to defend itself against
attack.
4. Presentation All style Most style Few style Very few style
Style: features were features were features were features were
used used used used, none of
convincingly convincingly convincingly them
Tone of voice, clarity convincingly
of expression,
precision of arguments
all contribute to
keeping audience’s
attention and
persuading them of the
team’s case.
TOTAL
SCORE:

_______

(Divide by 4)

AVERAGE FOR NEGATIVE


TEAM: _______

Похожие интересы