Scientific Poster

HCR 566 Poster Presentation Scoring Rubric

Rubric Assessing the effectiveness of Scientific Poster

Guidelines

Expert

Use appropriate evidence, presentation modes and/or argument strategies to skillfully communicate

meaning to a specified audience; communicate with clarity and fluency and in a virtually error-free

presentation.

Proficient

Use mostly appropriate evidence, presentation modes, and/or argument strategies to communicate

meaning to a specified audience; design a presentation that is clear and has few errors.

Emerging

Use some appropriate evidence, presentation modes, and/or argument strategies to communicate

meaning to a specified audience; design a presentation with limited clarity and/or some errors.

Novice

Use approaches or include errors that limit or obscure relevance and impede understanding.

Expert Proficient Emerging Novice

Articulation of Problem, Purpose, or Focus

Question, hypothesis, or position is articulated and defended in the context of the problem or purpose; and/or

A central purpose, focus, or essence of the work or performance is highly evident

Question, hypothesis, or position is stated clearly, and context of the problem or purpose is apparent; and/or

A central purpose, focus, or essence of the work or performance is evident

Question, hypothesis, or position is stated clearly; and/or

A purpose or focus of the work can be determined

Question, hypothesis, position, purpose, or focus is not visible or stated clearly

Scholarly Context

Comprehensively places problem/question in appropriate scholarly context (scholarly literature, theory, model, or genre)

Sufficiently places problem/question in appropriate scholarly context (scholarly literature, theory, model, or genre)

Partially places problem/question in scholarly context; some critical elements are missing, incorrectly

Scholarly context for the problem/question may be apparent but is not sufficiently demonstrated

HCR 566 Poster Presentation Scoring Rubric

developed, or unfocused

Application of Scholarly Method/Techni que to Project Design

Method/technique is appropriate for question or purpose

Data/sources/evid ence are expertly presented

All elements of method/technique are fully developed and articulated

Method/technique is appropriate for question or purpose

Data/sources/evid ence are adequately presented

Critical elements of method/technique are adequately developed; subtle elements are unclear or missing

Method/technique loosely supports the question or purpose

Data/sources/evid ence are partially presented

Critical elements of method/technique are partially developed

Method/technique is not appropriate for question or purpose

Data/sources/evid ence are minimally or not presented

Critical elements of method/technique are minimally developed

Analysis or Interpretation

Evidence supports a mature, complex, and/or nuanced analysis of the problem

Interpretation is explicitly linked to theoretical framework or scholarly model

Evidence supports an adequately complex analysis of the problem

Interpretation is adequately linked to theoretical framework or scholarly model

Evidence supports a limited analysis of the problem

Interpretation is partially linked to theoretical framework or scholarly model

Evidence supports very limited analysis of the problem

Implications/ Impact

Implications, consequences, and/or questions raised by the project are thoroughly explored

Limitations are fully articulated

Implications, consequences, and/or questions are adequately explored

Limitations are adequately articulated

Implications, consequences, and/or questions are partially explored

Limitations are partially articulated

Implications, consequences, and/or questions are minimally supported or unarticulated

Limitations are minimally or not articulated

Quality of Delivery

Presentation or performance is of superior quality

Delivery is free of technical errors

Presentation or performance is of high quality

Delivery has few technical errors

Presentation or performance is of acceptable quality

Delivery has some technical errors

Presentation or performance is of low quality

Delivery has frequent technical errors

HCR 566 Poster Presentation Scoring Rubric

Score Key: 0 = No Attempt 1 = Developing 2 = Competent 3 = Exemplary

1. Statement of Research Problem/Rationale:

a) Clearly stated questions or hypotheses being addressed 0 1 2 3

b) Well-explained rationale/justification for the study 0 1 2 3

c) Project objectives are clearly outlined 0 1 2 3 2. Literature Review/Background Theory:

a) Relevant previous work thoroughly reviewed 0 1 2 3

b) Gap in knowledge/exploration identified 0 1 2 3

c) Succinct 0 1 2 3

d) References are cited appropriately 0 1 2 3 3. Methods (Explanation/Appropriateness):

a) Clear description of methods used 0 1 2 3

b) Methods are appropriate to address aim/question 0 1 2 3 4. Analysis/Results:

a) Figures/tables used appropriately and clearly to present the data 0 1 2 3

b) Findings are presented clearly and accurately 0 1 2 3

c) Analysis is well explained and appropriately applied 0 1 2 3 5. Conclusion/Discussion: a) Addressed study’s problem/question 0 1 2 3 b) Conclusions are sufficiently supported by results 0 1 2 3 c) Results are placed into broader framework 0 1 2 3 d) Importance of findings is addressed 0 1 2 3 6. Presentation Overall:

a) Effective overall aesthetic/organization of poster 0 1 2 3

b) Flow of information is logical and facilitates understanding 0 1 2 3

Total ______ / 54 Comments: