LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSED:
1. Compose workplace documents including emails, letters, and a research report
2. Analyze an audience and tailor a message to that audience
3. Apply principles of grammar, punctuation, and editing appropriate to professional writing
4. Prepare documents according to basic principles of formatting and visual communication in various written documents
5. Demonstrate critical thinking skills in reading, writing, and discussion
6. Perform an effective oral online presentation
7. Employ research skills including locating, selecting, evaluating, and documenting source materials
8. Practice the ability to collaborate with peers
THE ASSIGNMENT and SCENARIO In groups of 2-‐4, present the findings of one of your research reports in a presentation (e.g. Power Point). You will be delivering this presentation in class, however pretend that it is made up of your superiors from a different company location. They have asked you to undertake the research and write the report (which is already completed). Now, you must deliver your findings so that your superiors can make an educated decision.
DETAILED CONTENT: Your presentation/Power Point should cover the following topics, organized by the following mandatory slides/steps:
1) Introduction slide
2) Table of Contents slide—give us a brief overview of what you plan to discuss
3) Introduction slide: provide your audience with context. Describe the problem, its background, and the necessity for a solution. Give your recommendations UP FRONT—let us know what you decided and why.
4) Criteria: What 3 did you pick? How did you compare them? Why were these the most logical selections for both?
5a) Criterion 1—the comparison, include a graphic (from the report)
5b) Criterion 2—the comparison, include a graphic (from the report)
5c) Criterion 3—the comparison, include a graphic (from the report)
6) Recommendations and Conclusions
7) Slide detailing your sources, correctly formatted in APA
8) Questions slide, and then thank the listeners.
OTHER EXPECTATIONS/ PARAMETERS
• Each member of the group must speak during the presentation • Adjust your tone and professionalism accordingly • Consider the fact that you may have audience members who are not familiar with the
technical details of your report. TIMETABLE OF PRESENTATIONS You can choose your own groups for this presentation by the end of week 8. A forum will be set up for you to post your date of choice, group members and topic. If you have not chosen a group by the end of week 8, a group will be chosen for you. Length of Presentations -‐Groups of 2 students: 8-‐10 minutes -‐Groups of 3: 10-‐15 minutes -‐ Groups of 4: 15-‐20 minutes EVALUATION and RUBRIC All members of the group will receive the same grade. Please see the official grading rubric on the next page. ADVICE ON GROUP WORK Working with others is a fundamental part of society. Please choose someone you can work with. If you do develop an issue with your partner that requires the professor’s attention, all group members must meet with the prof to address this issue in a public forum (or by cc’ing through emails). Keep in contact with each other. Write down your partner’s name and email, cell phone, Facebook page, or other information of each member and keep it handy. Discuss each member’s skills. Use these skills in preparing the presentation. Your group will run more smoothly if you play to each other’s strengths. Who is good at research? Who is good at creating visuals? Who is good at writing scripts?
Group Presentation Grading Rubric
Criteria Excellent (4) Very Good (3)
Good (2) Poor (1)
Preparation Clearly put exceptional effort into preparation & design.
Demonstrated very good presentation & design.
Work showed some evidence of preparation.
Work appeared to have been done at the last minute.
Visual Aids Visual aids added greatly to the presentation.
Visual aids were clear and helpful.
Visual aids were used, but were very wordy or could have been more helpful.
Visual aids were not particularly helpful or were not used.
Organization Presentation was exceptionally logical and superbly organized. Strong introduction and conclusion. Clear transitions from one speaker to another and from one topic to another.
Work had a clear introduction, body and conclusion. Good transitions between speakers and topics.
Presentation was generally organized, but lacked some clarity. Transitions were generally missing or not clearly linked.
Work was poorly organized or ideas were presented randomly. No transitions between speakers and/or topics.
Research Ideas were fully supported with clear research and examples.
Most ideas were supported with research and examples.
Some research was used or referenced.
Research was either not referenced or was not helpful.
Precision Presentation was laser-focused on the topic.
Presentation covered all the main points of the topic.
Presentation covered the topic, but occasionally took detours.
Presentation strayed from the main topic significantly.
Time Mgmt.
Showed exceptional time management skills.
Finished within the allotted time.
Went over the time limit, or went far too under the time limit.
Seemed unaware of the time or how to manage it.
Articulation Excellent and clear verbal articulation of major and minor points. Very concise and coherent. Speed was perfect. Tone was engaging.
Good articulation of major and minor points. Concise and coherent. Speed was a little fast/slow. Tone was good.
Articulation was not always clear and at times hard to understand (coherent). Speed was very fast/slow. Tone somewhat flat.
Poor articulation – not clear, not concise, not coherent. Speed was inappropriate for presentation. Monotone.
Eye Contact Strong eye contact with audience and among team members. Overall, did not read ppts or notes.
Good eye contact with audience and team. Referred to ppts or notes for guidance occasionally.
Eye contact with audience was fair. Read from ppts or notes too much.
No eye contact with audience. Completely read from ppts or notes.
Overall Quality Outstanding overall quality. A powerful, professional and memorable presentation.
Covered all the main points and was generally well delivered.
Could have put in more effort during the preparation and design stages to increase overall quality.
Generally sloppy. Weak presentation skills. Could have been much better.
