The document outlines the rubric for evaluating a student's thesis project defense. It includes three criteria: 1) ability to produce architectural drawings and the quality of the architectural solution, spatial planning, concept, and adherence to building laws and policies, 2) ability to answer questions, and 3) effective communication skills. Criterion 1 is worth 60 points and evaluates the drawings and design. Criterion 2 is worth 20 points and evaluates the student's ability to answer questions. Criterion 3 is worth 10 points and evaluates the student's communication skills during the presentation.
The document outlines the rubric for evaluating a student's thesis project defense. It includes three criteria: 1) ability to produce architectural drawings and the quality of the architectural solution, spatial planning, concept, and adherence to building laws and policies, 2) ability to answer questions, and 3) effective communication skills. Criterion 1 is worth 60 points and evaluates the drawings and design. Criterion 2 is worth 20 points and evaluates the student's ability to answer questions. Criterion 3 is worth 10 points and evaluates the student's communication skills during the presentation.
The document outlines the rubric for evaluating a student's thesis project defense. It includes three criteria: 1) ability to produce architectural drawings and the quality of the architectural solution, spatial planning, concept, and adherence to building laws and policies, 2) ability to answer questions, and 3) effective communication skills. Criterion 1 is worth 60 points and evaluates the drawings and design. Criterion 2 is worth 20 points and evaluates the student's ability to answer questions. Criterion 3 is worth 10 points and evaluates the student's communication skills during the presentation.
The document outlines the rubric for evaluating a student's thesis project defense. It includes three criteria: 1) ability to produce architectural drawings and the quality of the architectural solution, spatial planning, concept, and adherence to building laws and policies, 2) ability to answer questions, and 3) effective communication skills. Criterion 1 is worth 60 points and evaluates the drawings and design. Criterion 2 is worth 20 points and evaluates the student's ability to answer questions. Criterion 3 is worth 10 points and evaluates the student's communication skills during the presentation.
- Architectural Solutions - Some architectural solutions - Architectural Solutions - Architectural Solutions ARCHITECTURAL were unclear and were unclear, unfocused and were clear and tried to were clear and focused to unfocused to address all addressed only 1 or 2 of the address all set Project address all set Project SOLUTION the set Project Objectives. set Project Objectives. Objectives but may still be Objectives. improved.
1-3 4-5 6-8 9-10 10 POINTS
-Spaces were not -Forty percent (40%) of the - All basic design - All basic design efficiently laid out. basic design considerations considerations (accessibility, considerations SPATIAL were compromised in the zoning, circulation and (accessibility, zoning, spatial planning. orientation) have been circulation and orientation) PLANNING satisfied in the spatial have been satisfied. planning. - Additional project-specific considerations have also been satisfied in the spatial planning. 1-3 4-5 6-8 9-10 10 POINTS CONCEPT & -There was no clear - Concept of the building - Concept of the building - Concept of the building concept of the building character was partially clear. character was reasonably character was very clear. CHARACTER character. clear. 1-3 4-5 6-8 9-10 10 POINTS BUILDING LAWS - There was 75% or more - There were 50% to 74% - There were 25% to 49% - There were less than violations on the major violations on the major violations on the major 25% or no violations on & POLICIES building standards building standards required building standards required the major building required for the nature of for the nature of the project for the nature of the project standards required for the the project proposal. proposal. proposal. nature of the project proposal. COMPLETENESS 1-3 4-5 6-8 9-10 10 POINTS - Fifteen percent (15%) of - Ten percent (10%) of the - Five percent (5%) of the - All drawing requirements (See list of Required the required drawing required drawing required drawing had been complied with. Drawing requirements had been requirements had been requirements had been Requirements) complied with. complied with. complied with.
1-3 4-5 6-8 9-10 10 POINTS
-There was 30% -There was 20% -There was 10% -There was appropriate inappropriate use of inappropriate use of inappropriate use of use of architectural ARCHITECTURAL architectural drafting architectural drafting architectural drafting drafting language language (symbols and language (symbols and language (symbols and (symbols and legend). PRESENTATION legend). legend). legend). - Presentation was highly AND RENDERING - Presentation was not - Presentation was partially - Presentation was capturing and acceptable capturing and acceptable capturing and acceptable as reasonably capturing and as an architectural work TECHNIQUES as an architectural work an architectural work and acceptable as an and showed excellent and did not manifest any showed minimal rendering architectural work and rendering technique. rendering technique. technique. showed appropriate rendering technique.
CRITERION 2 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 20 POINTS
- Answers are unclear and - Answers are slightly unclear - Answers are clear but - Answers are clear and unfocused. and unfocused. unfocused. focused. - Too little supporting detail - Supporting details for the - Supporting details for the - Has strong, supporting ABILITY TO or too much irrelevant, answers are often limited, answers are relevant but details to most answers inaccurate data presented overly general or slightly off- may not be consistently ANSWER in the answers topic strong (20%) - Hardly answered the -Took a while before -Waiting time for the answer -Immediately answered questions attempting to answer was not too long properly
CRITERION 3 1-3 4-5 6-8 9-10 10 POINTS
- Words are flat or vague; - Words rarely hold audience - Uses words that work but - Precise, descriptive colorful language is interest; occasional dull do not create a strong language makes a strong ABILITY TO exaggerated and forced. expressions or clichés impact impact DISPLAY - Frequent errors in - Distracting lapses in - Grammar and usage are - Grammar and usage grammar and usage grammar or usage usually correct almost entirely correct interfere with meaning - Little or no eye contact; - Minimal eye contact with - Eye contact present but not - Effective eye contact EFFECTIVE dependent on reading of audience; reading from made consistently with all supports audience COMMUNICATION content presentation or cue cards members of the audience involvement SKILLS most of the time - Rate is too fast or slow; - Some rate or volume - Effective rate, volume, - Effective variations in (LANGUAGE Volume is too loud or soft; inadequacies; Little variation tone and voice inflection are tone, rate, volume and AND Monotone or highly erratic in tone or voice inflection appropriate to audience and voice inflection are DELIVERY) voice inflection purpose appropriate to audience and purpose (10%) - Halting delivery with - Somewhat halting delivery - Generally fluent delivery - Fluent delivery frequent fillers like, “um”, with frequent fillers like, “um”, “uh”, “you know” or any “uh”, “you know” or any equivalent in the local equivalent in the local language. language. CRITERION 4 1-3 4-5 6-8 9-10 10 POINTS - Attire is not neat and - Attire is neat and - Attire is professionally - Attire is professionally professionally acceptable professional enough but acceptable but has little acceptable and adds in a defense proceeding. creates less impact to impact to personality. impact to personality. ATTIRE, personality. CONFIDENCE, PROFESSIONALIS - Confidence is poor. - Confidence shown with a - Confidence shown with a - Confidence is very M AND bad posture good posture, facial notable. COURTESY expressions and good body movement. (10%) - Needs to greatly improve - Needs to improve manner - Manner of answering and - Manner of answering and manner of answering or of answering or addressing addressing the panel or jury addressing the panel or addressing the panel or the panel or jury. is acceptable. jury is highly jury. commendable.
