Benchmark – Community Teaching Plan: Community Presentation Assignment

Presentation is clearly based on Teaching Work Plan and any documented provider feedback. All aspects are consistent with Teaching Work Plan.

Presentation is based on Teaching Work Plan and any documented provider feedback. All aspects are generally consistent with Teaching Work Plan.

Presentation is generally based on Teaching Work Plan and any documented provider feedback. Some aspects are unclear. There are minor inconsistencies with Teaching Work Plan.

Presentation partially based on a Teaching Work Plan. Documented provider feedback is not integrated. Major aspects are incomplete. More information is needed.

Presentation is not based on a Teaching Work Plan.

Presentation provides specific information that focuses on the identified population and includes all diverse attributes for that population. Presentation is highly relevant to the community setting chosen. Additional health care settings where this individual education plan could be used are identified and highly relevant. The presentation demonstrates insight into providing individual education to diverse patient populations.

Presentation provides information for the identified population and includes many diverse attributes for that population. Presentation is pertinent to the community setting chosen. Some additional health care settings where this individual education plan could be used are proposed. Some detail is needed for clarity.

Presentation provides general information for the identified population. Some diverse attributes for that population are presented. Presentation is appropriate to the community setting chosen. At least one health care setting where this individual education plan could be used has been proposed. There are some inaccuracies. Minor detail or rationale is needed for support.

Presentation is incomplete. Significant information for the identified population is omitted or unclear. Some diverse attributes for that population are presented; not all attributes are relevant to the population. The presentation does not seem appropriate for the health care setting. There are major inaccuracies. More information is needed.

Presentation does not include individualized education to a diverse patient population in an appropriate community setting.

The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea.

The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Includes persuasive information from reliable sources.

The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.

The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Includes some persuasive information.

The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information. Includes little persuasive information. Sequencing of ideas is unclear.

The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.

The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.

The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.

The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.

The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.

Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.

Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.

Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.

Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English.

Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.

Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

Sources are not documented.