[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
37 views3 pages

Evaluation Rubric: Research Study Topic Defense: Topic Proponents Program Group No. 2

Uploaded by

fucker101 hehe

This document contains an evaluation rubric for a research study topic defense presented by three mechanical engineering students. The rubric assesses 10 criteria on a scale of 1 to 5, including clearly defining the problem, identifying how it relates to the university's research agenda, proposing a solution, and demonstrating knowledge during questioning. A total score is calculated and used to determine an overall performance rating of does not pass, pass with major revisions, pass with minor revisions, or accepted as presented. The panelist signs off with any additional comments.

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt

Evaluation Rubric: Research Study Topic Defense: Topic Proponents Program Group No. 2

Uploaded by

fucker101 hehe
37 views3 pages
This document contains an evaluation rubric for a research study topic defense presented by three mechanical engineering students. The rubric assesses 10 criteria on a scale of 1 to 5, including clearly defining the problem, identifying how it relates to the university's research agenda, proposing a solution, and demonstrating knowledge during questioning. A total score is calculated and used to determine an overall performance rating of does not pass, pass with major revisions, pass with minor revisions, or accepted as presented. The panelist signs off with any additional comments.

Original Description:

asda

Original Title

asd

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

This document contains an evaluation rubric for a research study topic defense presented by three mechanical engineering students. The rubric assesses 10 criteria on a scale of 1 to 5, including clearly defining the problem, identifying how it relates to the university's research agenda, proposing a solution, and demonstrating knowledge during questioning. A total score is calculated and used to determine an overall performance rating of does not pass, pass with major revisions, pass with minor revisions, or accepted as presented. The panelist signs off with any additional comments.

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
37 views3 pages

Evaluation Rubric: Research Study Topic Defense: Topic Proponents Program Group No. 2

Uploaded by

fucker101 hehe
This document contains an evaluation rubric for a research study topic defense presented by three mechanical engineering students. The rubric assesses 10 criteria on a scale of 1 to 5, including clearly defining the problem, identifying how it relates to the university's research agenda, proposing a solution, and demonstrating knowledge during questioning. A total score is calculated and used to determine an overall performance rating of does not pass, pass with major revisions, pass with minor revisions, or accepted as presented. The panelist signs off with any additional comments.

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 3

EVALUATION RUBRIC: RESEARCH STUDY TOPIC DEFENSE

Topic Temporary Evacuation Table Shelter during Earthquake: For UPHSD People Safety

Proponents 1.John Ronald D. Acda 2.Edwin Malabanan 3.Donald Marc Castillo


Program Bachelor of Science in Mechanical engineering Group No. 2
___________________________________________________________________________________
Point System Legend: 1 – Needs Significant Improvement; 2 – Needs improvement; 3 – Acceptable; 4 – Very Good; 5 – Excellent

Please check the appropriate points based assessment criteria. 1 2 3 4 5


1. Problem Definition: States the research problem/ objectives clearly, providing motivation
for undertaking the research.
2. Problem Identification: States the relation of the problem identified aligned to the
university’s research agenda
3. Technology Gap/ Opportunity Identification: Research study to possibly fill the gap
between the existing and the desired condition
4. Solution Identification: The research study is the possible solution for the problem
identified.
5. Local relevance of the solution: Application of the study intended to help the community
and others
6. Program Significant of the Solution: Relatively based on the field of practice
7. Quality of Oral Communications: Communicates clearly and professionally. Questions
directly and succinctly.
8. Critical Thinking: Demonstrates capability for independent research in the area of study.
Preparedness in core disciplines relevant to research, and ability to complete the research.
9. Format and Organization. Document is well-organized and logical. Guides the reader
through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.
10. Answers to questions. Demonstrate knowledge related to topic and research agenda.
Total Score : _______
Points Equivalent : _______
Notes:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING:

________ Does not pass/ Re-defense (24 points and below)


________ For reconsideration after major revisions (25 – 33 points)
________ Pass with Minor revisions (34 – 42 points)
________ Accepted in present Form (43 points & above)

Comments:

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Panellist: ________________________________Signature: _______________________________Date:______________
EVALUATION RUBRIC: RESEARCH STUDY TOPIC DEFENSE
Topic Design of Vertical Axis Wind Turbine for electricity generation and Water Pump
Application.
Proponents 1.John Ronald D. Acda 2.Edwin S. Malabanan 3.Donnald Marc Castillo
Program Bachelor of Science in Mechanical engineering Group No. 2
___________________________________________________________________________________
Point System Legend: 1 – Needs Significant Improvement; 2 – Needs improvement; 3 – Acceptable; 4 – Very Good; 5 – Excellent

Please check the appropriate points based assessment criteria. 1 2 3 4 5


1. Problem Definition: States the research problem/ objectives clearly, providing motivation
for undertaking the research.
2. Problem Identification: States the relation of the problem identified aligned to the
university’s research agenda
3. Technology Gap/ Opportunity Identification: Research study to possibly fill the gap
between the existing and the desired condition
4. Solution Identification: The research study is the possible solution for the problem
identified.
5. Local relevance of the solution: Application of the study intended to help the community
and others
6. Program Significant of the Solution: Relatively based on the field of practice
7. Quality of Oral Communications: Communicates clearly and professionally. Questions
directly and succinctly.
8. Critical Thinking: Demonstrates capability for independent research in the area of study.
Preparedness in core disciplines relevant to research, and ability to complete the research.
9. Format and Organization. Document is well-organized and logical. Guides the reader
through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.
10. Answers to questions. Demonstrate knowledge related to topic and research agenda.
Total Score : _______
Points Equivalent : _______
Notes:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING:

________ Does not pass/ Re-defense (24 points and below)


________ For reconsideration after major revisions (25 – 33 points)
________ Pass with Minor revisions (34 – 42 points)
________ Accepted in present Form (43 points & above)

Comments:

________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Panellist: ________________________________Signature: _______________________________Date:______________

You might also like