Different students may legitimately approach their presentations in different ways and sometimes particular strength in one area can offset weakness in another. But the following criteria gives you an idea of the areas to think about when preparing and presenting, and what makes for a good presentation.
First Class (marks of 74+)
- Information: detailed, accurate, relevant; key points highlighted;
- Structure: rigorously argued, logical, easy to follow;
- Analysis and Interpretation: extensive evidence of independent thought and critical analysis;
- Use of relevant and accurate Evidence: key points supported with highly relevant and accurate evidence, critically evaluated;
- Presentation Skills: clear, lively, imaginative; good use of visual aids (where appropriate);
- Time Management: perfectly timed, well organised;
- Group Skills: engages well with group; encourages discussion and responds well to questions.
2.1 Upper Second (62-68)
- Information: detailed, accurate, relevant;
- Structure: generally clearly argued and logical;
- Analysis and Interpretation: attempts to go beyond the ideas presented in secondary literature;
- Use of relevant and accurate Evidence: most points illustrated with relevant and accurate evidence;
- Presentation Skills: generally clear, lively; use of appropriate visual aids;
- Time Management: well organised, more or less to time;
- Group Skills: attempts to engage with group and responds reasonably well to questions.
2.2 Lower Second (52-58)
- Information: generally accurate and relevant, but perhaps some gaps and/or irrelevant material;
- Structure: not always clear or logical; may be overly influenced by secondary literature rather than the requirements of the topic;
- Analysis and Interpretation: little attempt to go beyond or criticise secondary literature;
- Use of relevant and accurate Evidence: some illustrative material, but not critically evaluated and/or some inaccuracies and irrelevancies;
- Presentation Skills: conveys meaning, but sometimes unclear or clumsy;
- Time Management: more or less right length, but some material not covered properly as a result, OR, significantly over-runs;
- Group Skills: responds reasonably well to questions, but makes no real attempt to engage with group or promote discussion
- Information: limited knowledge, with some significant gaps and/or errors;
- Structure: argument underdeveloped and not entirely clear;
- Analysis and Interpretation: fairly superficial and generally derivative and uncritical;
- Use of relevant and accurate Evidence: some mentioned, but not integrated into presentation or evaluated; the evidence used may not be relevant or accurate
- Presentation Skills: not always clear or easy to follow; unimaginative and unengaging;
- Time Management: significantly over time; material fairly disorganised and rushed;
- Group Skills: uncomfortable responding to questions; no attempt at engaging with group.
- Information: very limited, with many errors and gaps;
- Structure: muddled, incoherent;
- Analysis and Interpretation: entirely derivative, generally superficial;
- Use of relevant and accurate Evidence: little or no evidence discussed; or irrelevant and inaccurate.
- Presentation Skills: clumsy, disjointed, difficult to follow, dull;
- Time Management: significantly under or over time; has clearly not tried out
- material beforehand; disorganised;
- Group Skills: poor.