The document outlines criteria and scoring for a debate on raising the legal age to become President and Vice President. A team arguing for raising the age scored 64 out of 96 points by demonstrating an in-depth understanding of the topic, organizing their materials and presentation well, presenting five complex arguments supported by evidence, delivering their points convincingly, and each member presenting a complementary argument.
The document outlines criteria and scoring for a debate on raising the legal age to become President and Vice President. A team arguing for raising the age scored 64 out of 96 points by demonstrating an in-depth understanding of the topic, organizing their materials and presentation well, presenting five complex arguments supported by evidence, delivering their points convincingly, and each member presenting a complementary argument.
The document outlines criteria and scoring for a debate on raising the legal age to become President and Vice President. A team arguing for raising the age scored 64 out of 96 points by demonstrating an in-depth understanding of the topic, organizing their materials and presentation well, presenting five complex arguments supported by evidence, delivering their points convincingly, and each member presenting a complementary argument.
The document outlines criteria and scoring for a debate on raising the legal age to become President and Vice President. A team arguing for raising the age scored 64 out of 96 points by demonstrating an in-depth understanding of the topic, organizing their materials and presentation well, presenting five complex arguments supported by evidence, delivering their points convincingly, and each member presenting a complementary argument.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2
Team score
Criteria 2 point 4 point 8 point 16 point
Team Support Team Against Unclear about Seemed to Understood topic Clearly understood Understanding of debate topic. understand main in-depth topic in- depth and Topic points. presented information Unorganized data, Some moments Organized materials Well organized Organization evidence and disorganization of and presentation materials and presentation materials presentation Debate lacked Less than four Four arguments Five or more arguments that arguments raised clearly presented to arguments presented support proposition throughout debate support proposition to support Arguments to support proposition, arguments complex proposition and articulate Few or no relevant Some relevant Debate adequately Numerous support supporting evidence given, supported with materials given with Evidence evidence relevant somewhat relevant evidence every point questionable. addressed throughout debate Not convincing few Few style features Most style features Most style features style features used were used were used were used Delivery convincingly effectively convincingly and persuasively Arguments were Each member of the Each member of the Each member of the overlapping, team presented a team presented team presented an repetitive, or different argument different by argument that built Teamwork contradictory with minimal complementary on previous among teammates. overlap and arguments arguments repetition TOTAL SCORE: ______ / 96 _______ /96
Topic: Banning Online shops
Team score Criteria 2 point 4 point 8 point 16 point Team Support Team Against Unclear about Seemed to Understood topic Clearly understood Understanding of debate topic. understand main in-depth topic in- depth and Topic points. presented information Unorganized data, Some moments Organized materials Well organized Organization evidence and disorganization of and presentation materials and presentation materials presentation Debate lacked Less than four Four arguments Five or more arguments that arguments raised clearly presented to arguments presented support proposition throughout debate support proposition to support Arguments to support proposition, arguments complex proposition and articulate Few or no relevant Some relevant Debate adequately Numerous support supporting evidence given, supported with materials given with Evidence evidence relevant somewhat relevant evidence every point questionable. addressed throughout debate Not convincing few Few style features Most style features Most style features style features used were used were used were used Delivery convincingly effectively convincingly and persuasively Arguments were Each member of the Each member of the Each member of the overlapping, team presented a team presented team presented an repetitive, or different argument different by argument that built Teamwork contradictory with minimal complementary on previous among teammates. overlap and arguments arguments repetition TOTAL SCORE: ______ / 96 _______ /96