Canossa School

City of Santa Rosa, Laguna, Philippines

(PAASCU Accredited)

RUBRIC FOR EVALUATING ORAL PRESENTATION OF RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Name of the panelist: _______________________________________ Date:________________________
Discipline: ________________________________________________
Working Title of the research proposal:
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Group number: _____________________
Name of Presenters:
1. ___________________________________ 3. ____________________________________

2. ___________________________________ 4. ____________________________________
SCORING KEYS
Outstanding (5 pts) - Excellent; meet the requirements and transcends the expectation; employs thoughtful, and beyond expected content; only has 1-2 minor revision/s.
Very Good (4 pts) - above average; meet the requirements; employ strong proposal, and informative but it lacks of depth; and has minimal (3) minor revisions.
Good (3 pts) - Average; meet the minimum requirement; informative but it lacks enthusiasm and creativity; and has 4 minor revisions and
Acceptable (2 pts) - below average yet considerable and acceptable; Somehow meet the requirements but shows little interest and little effort is demonstrated; and has 5 minor revisions.
Unacceptable (1 pt) – the proposal is rejected; do not meet the standard requirements at all; has more than 5 minor revisions and considered a major revision; recommended for a change of
research topic.
COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dimensions/ Criteria Unaccep Acceptable Good Very Outstanding
Instructions: kindly check the box that corresponds in each dimension/criterion. table (2) (3) good (5)
(1) (4)
Chapter 1: Introduction of the study
1. Background of the study shows why did the researchers come up with problem of the study.
2. The statement of the problem is clearly stated and it leads to research questions.
3. Objectives of the study or research questions are relevant, addressed the current issues and problems and it has usefulness to the school and
community.
4. The research questions are highly scientific, require empirical analysis, and answerable through research process.
5. The variables of the research proposal are well defined.
6. The research proposal is significant and will be certainly benefitted by the school and community.
7. The scope and delimitation of the proposed study are clearly articulated.
8. Conceptual framework is clearly illustrated in the figure/s.
9. Theoretical Framework is tested and highly supports the research study to make it feasible.
Chapter 2: Review of the Related Literature and Studies
1. Consistently follows the rules of Standard English for usage, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation.
2. Synthesizes research relevant information in a coherent manner and draws a logical conclusion.
3. References are acknowledged appropriately using basic APA citation style.
4. The gathered studies and literatures support the research proposal and help made the proposed research feasible.
5. The RRL content contains the necessary details needed such as the variables, methodology, and etc. of the proposed research from the
previous works. (completeness)
Chapter 3: Research Design and Methodology
1. The research design and methodology are clearly spoken/written.
2. The sampling method to be used is valid and reliable.
3. Statistical treatment/s to employ in the study is appropriate and accurate.
4. The testing procedures/data gatherings are clearly demonstrated.
Visual and oral presentation
1. The thoughts are well organized, and effectively communicated to the panelist.
2. The flow of information is logical and facilitated understanding.
3. The researchers summarized the proposed study clearly, precisely, and timely (time-wise).
4. The researchers illustrate thorough understanding of the research proposal.
5. The researchers exude confidence on their research proposal and share the ideas enthusiastically.
6. The power point presentation is well organized, comprehensible and follows sequence and requirements.
7. The answer to the defense-questions conveys a sense of mastery of the study.
TOTAL
SCORE
/125