������б��俪�����

4

3

2

1

• Poster contains ALL necessary components to convey a complete picture of the proposed study
• Excellent use of research terminology
• Conveyed sophisticated understanding of the topic
• Demonstrated excellent grasp of key research concepts and processes

• Poster contains enough components to convey a mostly complete picture of the proposed study
• Good use of research terminology
• Conveyed good understanding of the topic
• Demonstrated good grasp of key research concepts and processes

• Poster contains enough components to convey an adequate picture of the proposed study
• Adequate use of research terminology
• Conveyed adequate understanding of the topic
• Demonstrated adequate grasp of research concepts and processes

• Poster contains multiple missing components so it is hard to understand the proposed study
• Poor use of research terminology
• Conveyed weak understanding of the topic
• Struggled to convey key research concepts and processes

• The poster is compelling, easy to read, and invites the reader through poster colours and formatting 
• Visuals and graphics effectively communicate key aspects of the research project
• The poster is well organized and has a logical flow
• The poster has an appropriate amount of text, is well written with no spelling or grammar errors
• References are included 

• The poster is easy to read and invites the reader through poster colours and formatting
• Visuals and graphics are mostly effective in communicating key aspects of the research project
• Some adjustments to the formatting are recommended
• The poster is mostly well organized and has a logical flow
• Text on the poster is mostly clearly conveyed
• Some grammar or spelling mistakes

• The poster is somewhat hard to read or somewhat uninviting
• Visuals and graphics are not effective in communicating key aspects of the research project
• There are notable formatting problems
• The poster is disorganized or is difficult to follow
• Text on the poster lacks clarity in some places
• Frequent grammar or spelling mistakes
• References are not included

• The poster is very hard to read and uninviting
• Visuals and graphics are unrelated to the research project
• Poster formatting requires significant revisions
• The poster is disorganized or is difficult to follow
• Text on the poster lacks clarity in many places
• Multiple grammar or spelling mistakes
• References are not included

• Presented engagingly, articulately, and with enthusiasm
• Conveyed relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience
• The ‘so what’ of the study is clear and compelling
• Maintained eye contact

• Presentation style was effective, clear, and engaging
• Conveyed relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience
• Maintained eye contact

• Presentation style was at times effective, clear, and engaging
• Struggled to convey relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience
• Intermittent eye contact

• Presentation style lacked clarity and was difficult to follow
• Little to no eye contact

4

3

2

1

• Excellent use of research terminology
• Conveyed sophisticated understanding of the topic
• Demonstrated excellent grasp of key research concepts and processes

• Good use of research terminology 
• Conveyed good understanding of the topic
• Demonstrated good grasp of key research concepts and processes

• Presentation style was at times clear, effective, and engaging 
• Struggled to convey relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience
• Intermittent eye contact

• Poor use of research terminology 
• Conveyed weak understanding of the topic
• Struggled to convey key research concepts and processes

• Presented engagingly, articulately, and with enthusiasm
• Conveyed relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience
• The “so what” of the study is clear and compelling
• Maintained eye contact

• Presentation style was clear, effective, and engaging 
• Conveyed relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience
• Maintained eye contact

• Adequate use of research terminology 
• Conveyed adequate understanding of the topic
• Demonstrated adequate grasp of key research concepts and processes
   

• Presentation style lacked enthusiasm
• Did not reach an interdisciplinary audience
• Little or no eye contact

• Poster colours, formatting, and use of visuals and graphics effectively conveys the research project
• The poster is well organized and has logical flow 

• Poster colours, formatting, and use of visuals and graphics effectively are mostly effective
• Some adjustments to the formatting are recommended
• The poster is well organized and has a logical flow 

• Poster formatting requires revisions
• The poster is disorganized or is difficult to follow

• Poster formatting requires significant revisions
• The poster is disorganized or is difficult to follow

• The poster has an appropriate amount of text, is well written with no spelling or grammar errors
• All components of the research study are included
• References are included 

• Text on the poster is mostly clearly conveyed
• All necessary components of the research study are provided
• Some grammar or spelling mistakes 
• References are included 

• Text on the poster lacks clarity 
• Some components of the research study are missing
• There are some grammar or spelling mistakes and/or references are not included 

• Text on the poster cannot be understood
• References are not included 

4

3

2

1

• Presentation style was effective, clear, engaging, and delivered with enthusiasm
• Maintained eye contact

• Presentation style was effective, clear, and engaging
• Maintained eye contact

• Presentation style was at times effective, clear, and engaging
• Intermittent eye contact

• Presentation style lacked clarity and was difficult to follow
• Little to no eye contact

• Conveyed relevance of research topic to an interdisciplinary audience
• The “so what” of the study was clear and compelling

• Conveyed relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience
• The “so what” of the study was apparent

• Struggled to convey relevance of research topic to interdisciplinary audience

• Did not reach an interdisciplinary audience

• Used appropriate methodology according to discipline 
• Presented a compelling argument and developed it persuasively with reference to relevant evidence and sophisticated analysis
• Conveyed wider significance of findings

• Used appropriate methodology according to discipline 
• Presented an argument and developed it with reference to evidence and analysis
• Conveyed significance of findings

• Methodology was not clearly suited to the research project
• Aspects of an argument were supported by some evidence and analysis 
• Did not convey significance of findings

• Methodology was unclear
• Little detectable argument
• Did not convey significance of findings