Evaluation

COM 227 Module Six Evaluation Checklist Before you submit your presentation to your supervisor for review, you must double check that it contains all the topic areas and items requested. Using the evaluation checklist below, assess the draft of your presentation (the milestones you have submitted in previous modules) against the assignment requirements outlined in the Final Project Rubric. This will help you to identify what to improve on or change in your presentation before submitting the final version next week. In addition to responding to the Module Six journal assignment prompts, be sure to attach this completed checklist as your self-evaluation of the presentation in the journal entry.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%)

Evaluation What level does your presentation rate:

exemplary, proficient, or other? Provide details as to how your presentation achieved

exemplary or proficient status or what changes you can make to achieve one of those levels.

Implementing: History of Public

Relations

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates keen insight into the critical milestones in public relations and how they relate to the growth and history of the field

Provides a brief overview of the history of public relations, including critical milestones and the growth of the field

Provides an overview of the history of public relations as presented in the course, but overview is cursory, not brief, or does not include the critical milestones and growth of the field

Does not provide an overview of the history of public relations as presented in the course

Implementing: Modern Public

Relations

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates keen insight into the idea of modern public relations

Explains the idea of modern public relations, supporting with evidence from the course or prior research

Explains the idea of modern public relations, but explanation is cursory, contains inaccuracies, or is not supported with evidence from the course or prior research

Does not explain the idea of modern public relations

Implementing: Practice Today

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response makes cogent connections regarding the relationship between the past history of public relations and the modern practice of public relations

Explains how the history of the field has influenced the perception of the practice of public relations today, supporting connections with evidence from the course or prior research

Explains how the history of the field has influenced the perception of the practice of public relations today. but explanation is cursory, contains inaccuracies, or is not supported with evidence from the course or prior research

Does not explain how the history of the field has influenced the perception of the practice of public relations today

Implementing: Approach

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates a sophisticated awareness of the professional approaches to addressing issues of ethics used in the field of public relations

Determines a professional approach that could be used in addressing ethical issues regarding public relations with evidence from prior research and planning

Determines a professional approach that could be used in addressing ethical issues regarding public relations, but determination is cursory, contains inaccuracies, or is not supported with evidence from prior research and planning

Does not determine a professional approach that could be used in addressing ethical issues regarding public relations

Implementing: Best Practices

and AP Writing Style

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and presentation and accompanying speaker notes demonstrate a sophisticated awareness of when and how to use best practices and AP style in public relations projects

Utilizes appropriate best practices and AP style throughout the presentation and accompanying speaker notes

Utilizes best practices and AP style throughout the presentation and accompanying speaker notes, but utilization contains inaccuracies or is not appropriate

Does not utilize best practices and AP style throughout the presentation and accompanying speaker notes

Evaluation: Improved

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and makes a cogent defense of potential improvements

Explains potential ways that any errors or issues in the presentation could be improved and justifies response

Explains potential ways that any errors or issues in the presentation could be improved but does not justify response, or explanation is cursory or illogical

Does not explain potential ways that any errors or issues in the presentation could be improved

Evaluation: Four- Step Public

Relations Process

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response makes cogent connections regarding the benefits of the individual steps of the four-step process and the process as a whole

Explains how the completed presentation benefited from the four- step public relations process

Explains how the completed presentation benefited from the four- step public relations process, but explanation is cursory or illogical

Does not explain how the completed presentation benefited from the four- step public relations process

Evaluation: Personal,

Professional, or Academic

Experiences

Meets “Proficient” criteria and provides cogent examples regarding the personal, professional, or academic applications of the four-step public relations process

Explains how the four-step public relations process could be used to plan for personal, professional, or academic experiences in the future, and supports with examples

Explains how the four-step public relations process could be used to plan for personal, professional, or academic experiences in the future, but explanation is cursory or illogical

Does not explain how the four-step public relations process could be used to plan for personal, professional, or academic experiences in the future

Articulation of Response

Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas