Followed Outline Format

10.0 pts Models outline example in the textbook; Includes clear technical plot, indictment, and examples; Includes all headings; Follows proper APA format. All sentences are full sentences; each point/subpoint is only one sentence; All sentences are used in strategic ways. Technical plot is clearly defined and demonstrates strategic thinking.

8.0 pts Follows some of the outline example template in the textbook; May be missing headings; All information required (as listed in the template) is visible. All sentences are full sentences. Technical plot is present.

6.0 pts Main elements of the outline are in place; Outline could use more headings, more clear structure, and/or more information; Outline points and/or subpoints require more development; Incorrectly formatted in-text citations; APA citations show thoughtful preparation but need some work. Full sentences are used throughout; one or two headings and/or structural elements may not have a full sentence. Technical plot evident but does not show strategic thought and/or design; technical plot and points may not align.

4.0 pts Outline does not follow the format outlined in the textbook. Inconsistent use of full-sentences throughout. Technical plot not identified.

0.0 pts No Marks

10.0 pts

Appropriate for Audience/Tailored Message

5.0 pts Speaker clearly identifies how the topic and/or indictment is applicable for the audience in a way that is deliberate, strategic, and/or innovative.

4.0 pts The speaker includes a statement about how the topic is important for the audience.

3.0 pts No clear statement about how the topic connects to the specific audience.

2.0 pts Topic is not appropriate to the audience; Speaker does not connect the audience and the topic.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Time

5.0 pts Used time strategically; Timing shows thoughtful evidence of preparation; did not go above or below the time-limit.

4.0 pts Speech is within the allotted time frame.

3.0 pts Meets the time limit but does not demonstrate careful consideration about how to best use time effectively (i.e., a little on the short side but needing more information; a little long but repetitive).

2.0 pts Student is over- or under-time.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Research and Support

10.0 pts Includes at least 3 scholarly sources; Research logically maps to personal experience and/or discussion of the topic; Research is strong and passes the "credibility test."

8.0 pts Speaker uses at least 3 reputable sources; use of research clearly connects to the point/subpoint

6.0 pts At least 3 sources are cited; at least 2 sources are scholarly sources; research used is not the strongest possible research that could've been used to support the claim; research may not immediately connect to the argument.

4.0 pts Research is presented haphazardly; Research does not add value to the speech.

0.0 pts No Marks

10.0 pts

Effective reasoning/free of logical fallacy/makes sense

5.0 pts Argument is clear; Reasoning supporting that argument is clear and supported with both scholarly research and personal experience/discussion.

4.0 pts Reasoning makes sense and is justified through experience and/or research; No logical fallacies are present.

3.0 pts Overall, the speech's argument makes sense; There may be "missed opportunities" to further clarify reasoning and/or insert more citation support for reasoning; Reasoning may raise a question or two but appears to be overwhelmingly logically coherent.

2.0 pts Speech raises concerns that are not addressed by the speaker; Flaws in logic are apparent; Speech content is excessively biased.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Intro: Grabbed Attention

5.0 pts Introduction is extremely creative, provocative, and/or engaging; The speaker grabs the audience's attention from the very first words out of their mouth.

4.0 pts Introduction was well-designed and grabbed the audience's attention.

3.0 pts Introduction shows careful wordsmithing (i.e., development on paper) but is not delivered in an engaging way; Student begins with "My name is...." and/or "My speech will be about..."

2.0 pts Introduction is not engaging; Introduction does not begin with attention device; Student "fumbles" before moving into the introduction; Attention device is not evident.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Intro: Preview

5.0 pts Preview is clear and fluid; Preview does not seem like an afterthought and is instead integrated as a strategic blueprint to the rest of the speech.

4.0 pts A preview was evident and connected to the thesis statement and the subsequent information (i.e., it wasn't just floating out there)

3.0 pts A preview is somewhat clear but should be presented more strategically; preview is excessively general and does not adequately present the scope of the points about to be made.

2.0 pts No preview evident; Some semblance of a preview there but not presented strategically as a blueprint for the speech.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Intro: Provided Obvious Thesis Statement

5.0 pts Thesis statement is clear, well-designed, and strategically connected to other structural elements of the speech.

4.0 pts Thesis statement was obvious; thesis connected to the attention statement and the preview.

3.0 pts Thesis statement can be located but is not highlighted and/or may not be as robust as it needs to be.

2.0 pts Thesis statement not evident; Some semblance of a thesis there but not presented strategically.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Body: Clear points

5.0 pts Main points show deliberate and strategic design; Main points connect to the thesis; Main points are clearly identifiable.

4.0 pts Arguments are supported by research and/or personal experience; Points are well-structured; Points are ordered logically (i.e., spatially, topically, etc.); Points are clear and clearly distinct from the subpoints.

3.0 pts Main points are researched but research may not always echo the themes presented in the thesis statement; research detracts or detours from the thesis; main points are confusing and not clearly delineated.

2.0 pts Points are not well-structured and/or connected to the thesis; Main points are haphazard; Main points need lacking the support necessary.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Conclusion: Review

5.0 pts Signposts are used at the end of the speech (in conclusion); The speaker reviews the main premises (i.e. points) of the speech; The thesis is clearly, strategically, and boldly restated near the end of the speech.

4.0 pts Review statement is clearly identified.

3.0 pts Thesis restatement can be found but is not easily identified; Thesis statement there but not highlighted.

2.0 pts Thesis restatement not evident; Some semblance of a thesis there but not presented strategically.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Style: Clarity

5.0 pts The speech is free of all grammar/pronunciation/articulation errors; Clear evidence of thoughtful and strategic practice and planning; Sets the bar high for others' performance on this speech.

4.0 pts Speech is both professional and conversational; Speakers demonstrate clear preparation and strategic word choice.

3.0 pts Speaker may be "too professional" or "too casual." Does not demonstrate strategic mastery over the delivery style; Has not demonstrated critical thought about delivery.

2.0 pts Speech language not carefully considered; Speaker is not accessible and/or distracting due to language choice; Speaker does not demonstrate a clear commitment to professional delivery.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Style: Passion

5.0 pts Language is clear, accurate, and vivid; Passion is clear and convicting; The speech's argument is presented in a way that invites the audience to act upon it based solely on the passion from the speaker

4.0 pts Speaker appears passionate and use language to further enhance the value of their argument.

3.0 pts Speaker has good words prepared but has not demonstrated effective and vivid delivery of those words; speech is organized but not presented in an engaging way; speaker needs to ramp up the passion.

2.0 pts Speaker is not clear and vivid; speaker lacks passion; speaker fails to engage the audience due to delivery style.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Style: Transitions

5.0 pts Transitions are clear, seamless, and show evidence of thoughtful preparation; Transitions both summarize the previous point and the point about to be made (signposts).

4.0 pts Transitions can be clearly identified throughout all points; all transitions are evident.

3.0 pts Transitions evident but not always clear; transitions not clear throughout.

2.0 pts Transitions not evident.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Delivery: Eye contact

5.0 pts Eye contact is strategic and shows evidence of preparation (eye contact may be toward the webcam or audience); Note cards are used less than 15% of the time; No reading off of the wall and/or a computer monitor.

4.0 pts Eye contact is strong; Looks at cards 20-35% of the time; Does not read from cards at length; Does not stare at a computer monitor; Does not read off of a wall.

3.0 pts Speaker reads 45-50% of the time; speaker reads at length; speaker stares at wall and/or monitor; speaker does not demonstrate strategic eye contact.

2.0 pts Student reads more than 50% of the time; student reads at length; student reads from computer/wall; student does not engage the audience with eye contact.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Delivery: Focus

5.0 pts Speaker is engaging and conveys expertise over the subject matter; Speaker demonstrates a speaking style that is worthy to be heralded as the standard for other students. Speaker is engaged with the speech situation; Speaker remains focused throughout despite distractions; Speaker is willing to "interject" (i.e., dialogue around the prepared comments)

4.0 pts Speaker uses a variety of vocal techniques to engage the audience; Speaker shows thoughtful preparation in regard to vocal variety. Speaker "converses" with the audience; speaker is not distracted; speaker does not simply read their speech.

3.0 pts Speaker demonstrates some "extemporaneous" delivery but may fall into a non-engaging and/or monotone speaking style as the speech goes on. Speaker succumbs to some distractions (external or related to the delivery); Speaker "reads" the speech; Speaker feels robotic.

2.0 pts Student is monotone; student shows no careful preparation; student does not engage in a variety of vocal techniques; the message suffers because of delivery style. Student is distracted; Student reads speech; Student presents speech as if they are only doing so to complete the assignment.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Delivery: Movement

5.0 pts Speaker moves and uses gestures in a strategic ways.

4.0 pts Speaker uses movement and/or gestures to enhance their speech.

3.0 pts Speaker does not use movement; no evidence of preparation for gestures to supplement the speech.

2.0 pts Student does not move and/or use gestures in the speech; the student's movement is distracting.

0.0 pts No Marks

5.0 pts

Delivery: Context

10.0 pts Speaker's full body is visible; Speech is filmed in a highly professional location. The quality of recording is superb!

8.0 pts Most of the speaker's body is visible; Speech is filmed in an appropriate location. The quality of recording is appropriate.

6.0 pts Some of speaker's body is obscured; Speech should have been filmed in a more professional location. The quality of recording is not entirely professional.

4.0 pts Some of speaker's body is obscured; Filming location/style is not appropriate for this course. The recording quality hurts the credibility of the speaker due to its poor quality.

0.0 pts No Marks

10.0 pts

Purpose: Persuasive

10.0 pts Develops an integrative persuasive appeal by considering the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches, arguments, or alternatives. Addresses realistic implications for research or practice within the conclusion

8.0 pts Develops a persuasive appeal and recommendations that follow directly from a clear logical process

6.0 pts Begins to develop a persuasive appeal and/or recommendations that follow directly from evidence but needs more effort

5.0 pts Does not provide logical persuasive appeal, recommendations, or solutions

0.0 pts No Marks

10.0 pts

Citations

10.0 pts All sources are cited with at least 3 key pieces of information (i.e., author, date, article title, organization, journal, etc.); Citations show evidence of practice; Citations are cited fluidly and not in a distracting way.

8.0 pts A full citation is given, but verbal citation could be executed in a more strategic and/or fluid manner.

6.0 pts At least two pieces of citation information are present (i.e., author, date, publication); source citations feel "robotic", "canned," and/or read; one or more sources cited incorrectly.

4.0 pts Source citations are not appropriate; Speaker tries to cite sources but fails to do so correctly.

0.0 pts No Marks

10.0 pts