Class+Persuasion+Rubric


 * Class Debate: Persuasion Unit**


 * RUBRIC**


 * Understanding of Topic || The team clearly understood the topic in-depth and presented their information forcefully and convincingly. || The team clearly undestood the topic in-depth and presented their information with ease. || The team seemed to understand the main points of the topic and presented those with ease. || The team did not show an adequate understanding of the topic. ||
 * Organization || All arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. || Most arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. || All arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) but the organization was sometimes not clear or logical. || Arguments were not clearly tied to an idea (premise). ||
 * Information || All information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough. || Most information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough. || Most information presented in the debate was clear and accurate, but was not usually thorough. || Information had several inaccuracies OR was usually not clear. ||
 * Logos || Every major point was well supported with several relevant facts, statistics and/or examples. || Every major point was adequately supported with relevant facts, statistics and/or examples. || Every major point was supported with facts, statistics and/or examples, but the relevance of some was questionable. || Every point was not supported. ||
 * Pathos || Student consistently used relevant pathos in a way that emotionally moved the audience. || Student usually used relevant pathos in a way that emotionally moved the audience. || Student sometimes used relevant pathos in a way that emotionally moved the audience. || Student did not use pathos and did not emotionally move the audience. ||
 * Ethos || Student consistently demonstrated himself/herself to be a credible speaker. || Student usually consistently demonstrated himself/herself to be a credible speaker. || Student sometimes consistently demonstrated himself/herself to be a credible speaker. || Student did not establish himself/herself to be a credible speaker. ||
 * Roles (Stater/Prover) || Student fulfilled the function of his/her role. All information presented in the first portion of the debate was appropriate to his/her role. || Student usually fulfilled the function of his/her role. Most information presented in the first portion of the debate was appropriate to his/her role. || Student sometimes fulfilled the function of his/her role. Some of the information presented in the first portion of the debate was appropriate to his/her role. || Student did not fulfill the function of his/her role. Little, if any, of the information presented in the first portion of the debate was appropriate to his/her role. ||
 * Devices || Student effectively used persuasive devices such as elevated language, loaded language, rhetorical questions, imagery, etc. || Student usually used persuasive devices such as elevated language, loaded language, rhetorical questions, imagery, etc. || Student sometimes used persuasive devices such as elevated language, loaded language, rhetorical questions, imagery, etc. || Student rarely, if ever, used persuasive devices such as elevated language, loaded language, rhetorical questions, imagery, etc. ||
 * Rebuttal || All counter-arguments were accurate, relevant and strong. || Most counter-arguments were accurate, relevant, and strong. || Most counter-arguments were accurate and relevant, but several were weak. || Counter-arguments were not accurate and/or relevant ||
 * Respect for Other Team || All statements, body language, and responses were respectful and were in appropriate language. || Statements and responses were respectful and used appropriate language, but once or twice body language was not. || Most statements and responses were respectful and in appropriate language, but there was one sarcastic remark. || Statements, responses and/or body language were consistently not respectful. ||
 * Presentation Style || Team consistently used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience. || Team usually used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience. || Team sometimes used gestures, eye contact, tone of voice and a level of enthusiasm in a way that kept the attention of the audience. || One or more members of the team had a presentation style that did not keep the attention of the audience. ||