Audience has difficulty following presentation because of some abrupt jumps; some of the main points and conclusion are unclear.

Satisfactory organization; clear introduction; main points are well stated, even if some transitions are somewhat sudden; clear conclusion.

Superb organization; clear introduction; main points well stated and argued, with each leading to the next point of the talk; clear summary and conclusion.

Boring slides; numerous mistakes; no real effort made into creating a truly effective presentation; poor participation of team members.

Generally good set of slides; conveys the main points well.  Adequate participation of team members.

Very creative slides; carefully thought out to bring out both the main points as well as the subtle issues while keeping the audience interested.  Excellent participation of team members.

Low voice, occasionally inaudible; some distracting filler words and gestures; pronunciation 
not always clear.

Clear voice, generally effective delivery; minimal distracting gestures, but somewhat monotone.

Natural, confident delivery that does not just convey the message but enhances it; excellent use of volume and pace.

Occasional eye contact with audience but 
mostly reads the presentation; 
some awareness 
of a least a portion of the audience; only brief responses to questions.

Generally aware of the audience reactions; maintains good eye contact when speaking and when answering questions.

Keeps the audience engaged throughout the presentation; modifies material on-the-fly based on audience questions and comments; keenly aware of audience reactions.

Text rambles, key points are not organized, 
spelling/ grammar errors present throughout more than 1/3 of paper; style is inappropriate for audience, prescribed format is not followed.

Articulates ideas; one or two grammar/ spelling errors per page; prescribed format is followed.

Articulates ideas clearly and concisely, presented neatly and professionally, grammar and spelling are correct, uses good professional style and conforms to prescribed format.

Material generally well organized, but paragraphs combine multiple thoughts or section/
subsections are not identified clearly.

Organizes material in a logical sequence to enhance reader's comprehension (paragraph structure, subheadings, etc.).

Organizes material in a logical sequence to enhance reader's comprehension (paragraph structure, subheadings, etc.).

Rarely includes GTF even when required to do so.  Does not recognize when a GTF is appropriate to organize numbers and/or facts to enhance reader understanding.

Includes any required GTF. Recognizes other opportunities to organize numbers/facts in GTF form which mimic similar organizations shown in course work (present and previous).  Explicitly discusses the GTF significance in surrounding text.

All level 2 criteria. Shows evidence of independent organization of numbers/facts in GTF form beyond any previously seen in engineering coursework.

TF are sometimes difficult to read. Labels/legends/titles are missing and/or inappropriate.

GTF are easy to read.  GTF have appropriate labels and legends.  GTF have appropriate titles referring to relevant parts of the graphic (axes, legends, column/row heading, etc.)

All level 2 criteria. In addition, the graphics are visually appealing.

Few or no references. References poorly documented if present.

Sufficient authoritative references present.  Documentation of references does not conform to any particular standard.  Most references can be traced using the information given.

Sufficient authoritative references present.

All references given in IEEE reference format, or some other standard referencing scheme.  All references can be traced using the information given.

Comments missing or inadequate for personal use by the original programmer or by another user of the code.

Comments present.  Generally well written, but missed some opportunity to provide comments of benefit to subsequent users.

Well commented code.