1、 student id: _ evaluator name/role: _date: _graduate student thesis/dissertation defense evaluationthe attached evaluation tool (rubric) is designed to assist in the evaluation of a students ability to successfully defend his/her graduate research. the rubric includes seven evaluation criteria, and

2、allows for the addition of criteria important to individual departments/programs. evaluation of a thesis/dissertation can be an integral part of graduate student learning outcomes assessment conducted by graduate programs. it is applicable to all programs that have a thesis or dissertation requireme

3、nt. this evaluation tool will: provide students, prior to his/her defense, with a clear understanding of the elements of their defense deemed most important to the defense committee provide multiple perspectives of a students ability to successfully defend his/her research and engage in a cogent dis

4、course about his/her chosen field of study encourage conversations among departmental colleagues about improving graduate student learning outcomes and assessment serve as a potential source of program-level data on the accomplishment of the programs learning outcome objectives, for submission as pa

5、rt of a future assessment reportinstructions: defense committee members and students should review and become familiar with the criteria in the evaluation tool prior to the defense. the rubric should be scored at the conclusion of the defense, or shortly thereafter, by every member of the defense co

6、mmittee. this cover page (page 1) can then be completed (providing a summary of the scored ratings below for each of the seven criteria in the rubric), returned to the appropriate department/program office, and maintained in a confidential departmental file following the defense (one cover page per

7、evaluator). for use as a valuable tool in graduate student learning outcomes assessment. the remaining rubric pages (2 - 5) can be shared with the student or destroyed.student id:_ student name: _program: _degree: m.a. _ m.s. _ ph.d. _date of defense: _evaluator role:_ major advisor _ internal core

8、committee member _ external core committee member _ external defense committee member _ external defense committee member and defense chair other (explain) _defense score summary by criterion:assessment criteria: 1: _4: _7: _ 2: _5: _ 3: _6: _page 5assessment criteria4=exceptional3=strong2=marginal1

9、=unacceptablen/ascore1. mastery of fundamental knowledge in the fieldcomments:consistently applies fundamental and advanced concepts to topics in subject area. frequently applies fundamental and some advanced concepts to topics in subject area. somewhat applies fundamental concepts to topics in subj

10、ect area.does not apply fundamental concepts to topics in subject area.2. ability to access and integrate information into a cohesive overview of current knowledge; ability to critically evaluate the meaning, value, and contribution of published literature in the fieldcomments:command and understand

11、ing of the current research literature in the field.relates and understands the current research literature in the field.aware of the research literature in the field.knowledge is unrelated to the current research literature in the field.3. imagination and originality of thoughtcomments:problem/purp

12、ose of study very creative or original with new and innovative ideas;explored original topic and discovered new outcomes.problem/purpose of study originalor creative; design/approachappropriate or innovative.problem/purpose of study moderatelyoriginal or creative; design/ approach moderately appropr

13、iateor innovative.problem/purpose of study lackedcreativity or not new; duplication of previouswork. assessment criteria4=exceptional3=strong2=marginal1=unacceptablen/ascore4. ability to design and implement an appropriate collection and analysis of data or ability to articulate a critical response

14、to dramatic or artistic theory, literature, design and performance in ones own work or that of another artistcomments:data interpretation is appropriate and creatively uses correct methodology; identifies weaknesses in interpretation demonstrates a an advanced ability to articulate a critical respon

15、se to dramatic or artistic theory, literature, design and performance in ones own work or that of another artistdata interpretation is appropriate and uses many correct methodology; identifies some weaknesses in interpretation demonstrates a an ability to articulate a critical response to dramatic o

16、r artistic theory, literature, design and performance in ones own work or that of another artistdata interpretation is appropriate and uses limited number of correct methodology; identifies no weaknesses in interpretation demonstrates a an limited ability to articulate a critical response to dramati

17、c or artistic theory, literature, design and performance in ones own work or that of another artistdata interpretation is inappropriate and/or uses incorrect methodology; identifies no weaknesses in interpretation demonstrates a lack of ability to articulate a critical response to dramatic or artist

18、ic theory, literature, design and performance in ones own work or that of another artist5. ability to draw reasoned conclusions from a body of knowledgecomments:discussion was superior,accurate, and engaging;conclusions/summariesand recommendationsappropriate and clearlybased on outcomes.discussion

19、sufficient and with few errors; greater foundationneeded from past work in area;conclusions/summary based on outcomes and appropriate,included some recommendations.major topics or conceptsinaccurately described;considerable relevantdiscussion missing;conclusions/summary not entirely supported by fin

20、dings/outcomes.little discussion of project findings/outcomes;displayed poor grasp ofmaterial; conclusion/summary not supported by findings/outcomes.assessment criteria4=exceptional3=strong2=marginal1=unacceptablen/ascore6. oral presentation and defense of thesis/dissertationcomments:masterfully def

21、endsresearch by providingclear and insightfulanswers to questions;uses presentation resources asa guide, gives detailedexplanations, is easilyunderstandable, and keeps appropriate eye contact with theaudience.competently defends researchby providing veryhelpful answersto questions; mayoccasionally m

22、anifestneed for furtherreflection on minorpoints; uses presentation resources as a guide, is easily understandable, and keeps eye contact with the audience with the audience.adequately defendsresearch; answersquestions, but oftenwith little insight;frequently shows a need for deeper reflection on minor points; relies too much onpresentation and has difficulty speaking freely to the audience, and is somewhatcomfortable with thetopic.does not adequatelydefend research;does not answer key questions; frequentlyshows a need for deeper reflection on vital points;reads thematerial from present