Table 4 Poster presentation evaluation sheet II
From: Tools and evaluation methods for discussion and presentation skills training
Criteria | 0 | 1 | 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
Impact | |||
Title | None | Unclear | Concise and stands out |
Overall Appearance | Not visually appealing, no color or graphics | Uses colors and graphics | Visually appealing, nicecolors and graphics |
Interest | Not noticeable | Noticed but notinterested | Caught my interest |
Content | |||
Quality | Has no background,methodology, and results | Insufficient background,methodology, and results | Complete and sufficientbackground, methodology, and results |
Main Points | Not presented | Presented but not obvious, may be embedded in the text / graphics | Explicitly labeled (e.g.Objectives, Conclusion,Results) |
Organization | |||
Logical Structure | Cannot figure out how to move through the poster | Headings imply the flow | Very easy to navigatethrough the content |
Text Size | Too small | Readable | Very easy to read |
Text/Graphics Balance | Too much text or toomuch graphics | Not enough text todescribe the graphics | Balanced text and graphics, enough text to explain the graphics |
Presentation | |||
Communication | Voice is inaudible andexplanation is notunderstood | Explanation is somewhatunclear | Able to explain contentwell and clearly |
Questions | Answering of questions is lacking | Answering of questions isinadequate | Able to answer questionsclearly |