Professional Documents
Culture Documents
:
:
________________________________________________________________ Adviser:________________________
1. ______________________________________________________________
CRITERIA
W
T
50
20
15
B
SATISFACTORY
The accomplishment is
exemplary approaching to
perfection
Work is above of
acceptable criterion with
only few minor comments
and citation.
Work is in range of
acceptable criterion
with more than half of
the requirements are
satisfied.
Successfully identifies
and summarizes the main
issues, and to some extent
only few were not clearly
explain why/how
problems are realized.
Unable to clearly
identify, connect or
support the issue to the
propose topic based on
an information
presented.
Fails to identify,
summarize, or
explain the main
problem or
question.
Represents the
issues inaccurately
or inappropriately.
(20-19 pts)
(1815 pts)
(14-12 pts)
(6 pts)
( 0 pt )
(14 10 pts)
(9 8 pts)
(15 pts)
SIGNIFICANCE &
EXPECTED OUTPUT
Specifically identifies the
opportunity, perceived contribution
to its intended primary users, the
society, and architecture
(5 pts)
(4pts)
(3 pts)
disapproved
A
EXCEEDS
EXPECTATION
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
C
MET CRITERIA
approved
LESS
SATISFACTORY
E
NOT
ADDRESSED
(5 pts)
( 0 pt )
Most argument
presented are vague and
irrelevant.
The significance is
either not present
or very poorly
described.
(1 pt)
( 0 pt )
RATIN
G
SCOPE AND
DELIMITATION
10
THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK
20
REVIEW OF RELATED
LITERATURE (LOCAL &
FOREIGN)
10
TENTATIVE SITE
CRITERIA
10
Student attempts to
outline potential
methodological flaws in
the study, and is
partially successful in
doing so.
Student attempts to
outline potential
methodological flaws of
the study, but does so
sparsely and/or
ineffectively.
(10 pts)
(9 7 pts)
(6 -5 pts)
(3 pts)
(10 pts)
(9 7 pts)
(6 -5 pts)
(3 pts)
(10 pts)
(9 7 pts)
(6 -5 pts)
PRESENTATION
30
MASTERY
20
10
Over-all presentation is
flawless and
commendable. A very
professional output.
(20-19 pts)
ORAL & VISUAL
COMMUNICATION SKILL
(10 pts)
(1815 pts)
Over-all presentation is
neat and organized. Meets
the expectation of a
Lasallian Graduate
(9 7 pts)
Some evidence of
preparation, rehearsal,
and use of prior
feedback received
(14-12 pts)
Over-all presentation
approaches the
expectation of a
Lasallian Graduate
(6 -5 pts)
( 0 pt )
No Related
Literature were
presented
( 0 pt )
No Criterion and
tentative site is
presented.
(3 pts)
( 0 pt )
Little evidence of
preparation, rehearsal,
and use of prior
feedback received
Overall impact is
not convincing.
(6 pts)
( 0 pt )
Output is sloppy
and unprofessional
(2 pts)
( 0 pt )
TOTAL POINTS
Panelist: ___________________________________
Date: ___________________________________
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY-DASMARINAS
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
Architecture Department