Rubric for Leading Discussions

Exemplary

(8 pts. - 95%)

• presents a thorough history of the ethical issue that includes all major events leading up to the present
• presents an accurate and thorough explanation of the current status of the ethical issue
• selects a focal case study that is representative of the issue and which stimulates discussion of key ethics regarding the issue
• uses multiple scientific, objective resources as the basis for the presentation; does not present information assigned in the readings
• presents information in an organized and easily understood manner
• is knowledgable about the topic as demonstrated by answers to questions from the professor and class
• written materials have correct grammar, no typographical errors
• references are used and cited correctly
• shares leading the discussion equally with partner

Quality

(6 pts. - 85%)

• same as above but lacking excellence in one or two areas
• presentation of the history of the issue is mostly complete, but lacks some key events
• presentation of the current status of the issue is mostly complete, but lacks some key components
• the case study selecting is relevant to the topic, but does not fully represent the issues
• most resources are scientific; most information is not from assigned readings
• presentation lacks clarity in one or two areas
• is mostly knowledgable about the topic but lacking in one or two areas
• written materials and references have one or two errors
• discussion tends to be led by one of the presenters

Adequate

(4 pts. - 75%)

• meets the requirements but presenters are not thorough in their presentation of the history of the issue and/or the current status of the issue
• the case selected is relevant but narrow in focus and does represent the breadth of the ethics related to the issue
• uses one or two resources only and/or lacks use of scientific resources; presents some material already assigned to students to read
• presentation provides the class with a minimal understanding of the ethical issue
• presenters have a weak understanding of the issue - past and present
• written materials and references contain multiple errors
• discussion is dominated by one presenter

• minimal information, past and present, is presented about the ethical issue
• case study is marginally relevant
• focuses mainly on information available in the assigned readings rather than presenting new information to the class
• presenters are not prepared to answer questions and have minimal understanding and knowledge about the topic
• written materials are poorly prepared with multiple errors
• presenters do not share the presentation equitably

• fails to present, presents incorrent information, and/or plagiarizes in the written materials (additional action may be taken if plagiarism occurs)