<p> Scoring Rubric for Ph.D. Dissertation Defense (College of Marine Science) – (PhD Outcome 4)</p><p>Student______Date______Committee Member______</p><p>Circle the appropriated boxes in each category. Each student’s Dissertation Defense will be scored in five categories: Oral Presentation, Visual Presentation, Scientific Knowledge, Response to Questions from the General Audience, and Response to Questions from the Thesis Committee. The committee’s ranking will be based upon a five point scale (5 = Exemplary, 4 = Strong, 3 = Competent, 2 = Marginal, 1 = Unacceptable). The minimum successful score will be “Competent” or better from a majority of the Committee, with no score being “Unacceptable”.</p><p>Oral Presentation Visual Presentation Scientific Response to Response to Knowledge Questions from Questions from General Audience Thesis Committee y</p><p> r All supporting visual a</p><p> l Presentation delivered Provides substantial, </p><p> p aids (slides, in a highly professional well-chosen evidence Responds incisively m PowerPoint, etc.) were Responds incisively and e manner; confident in (research or textual and directly to the x designed in a highly directly to the questions E material and able to citations) to support questions asked. –</p><p> professional manner; asked. Responses to </p><p>5 communicate principles scientific concepts. Responses to questions visual aids supported questions are specific, clearly; precise diction Demonstrates high are specific, the oral presentation defendable, and and syntax; clear knowledge of defendable, and closely, and were complex. command of Standard concepts and complex. clear, concise, and English. terminology. necessary. g</p><p> n Visual aids were </p><p> o Presentation was Most responses are Most responses are </p><p> r generally well- Provides sufficient t coherently arranged; direct and relevant to direct and relevant to S designed, and and appropriate –</p><p> scientific principals and the questions asked. the questions asked. </p><p>4 communicated the evidence to support results were effectively Responses to question Responses to question information desired; scientific claims, and communicated; are more general, but are more general, but Some of the visual makes effort to place occasionally difficult to still accurate; analyses still accurate; analyses aids were unnecessary scientific findings in follow or awkward; go beyond the goes beyond the and could have been context. some wordiness. obvious. obvious. eliminated. t n</p><p> e Most scientific </p><p> t Responds adequately Responds adequately to e principals and results Provides some p Visual aids were only to the questions asked; the questions asked; </p><p> m were adequately evidence to support </p><p> o adequately designed occasionally responds occasionally responds </p><p>C communicated; much scientific claims, but and often were not with unrelated with unrelated –</p><p> of oral presentation was not always relevant, </p><p>3 able to communicate information. information. Responses not adequately prepared sufficient, or the information Responses to questions to questions are overly or irrelevant; integrated into the desired; Many of the are overly general and general and occasional grammatical response. May have visual aids were disorganized; may disorganized; may have errors, imprecise some factual, unnecessary and could have some factual, some factual, diction or awkward interpretive, or have been eliminated. interpretive, or interpretive, or syntax; general conceptual errors. conceptual errors. conceptual errors. wordiness. l</p><p> a Oral presentation Evidence to support n</p><p> i Visual aids were </p><p> g generally confusing; scientific findings Confuses some Confuses some r poorly designed and a repetitive, wanders; usually only narrative significant concepts in significant concepts in </p><p>M confusing; Many of frequent grammatical or anecdotal, and is the questions asked. the questions asked. –</p><p> the visual aids were </p><p>2 errors, imprecise generally awkwardly Responses to questions Responses to questions irrelevant and should diction; wordiness and or incorrectly are vague or irrelevant. are vague or irrelevant not have been used. awkward syntax. incorporated. e l b a</p><p> t Does not understand </p><p> p Oral presentation not Does not understand </p><p> e Visual aids were questions and/or c understandable. Not Little or no evidence questions and/or c sloppy and could not concepts. No a able to communicate cited to support concepts. No n be read or interpreted discernable response U</p><p> general concepts, scientific claims. discernable response to </p><p>– by the audience. to most questions results and findings. most questions given. 1 given.</p>