[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-436915-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":73,"doc-detail-436915-en":122},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":66,"head_meta":68,"extra_data":70,"updated_unix":72},105,"en","scoring-approaches-summary-for-the-imp-and-oral-defense","Scoring Approaches Summary for the IMP and Oral Defense","","This scoring rubric summarizes how to evaluate an Individual Multimedia Presentation (IMP) and its Oral Defense across six analytical and presentation criteria. It outlines what to look for in context and argument formation, how to assess relevance and integration of evidence, and how conclusions or solutions are judged for realism and consideration of limitations and implications. It also specifies audience engagement requirements for both design and performance, including clarity of delivery, eye contact, and purposeful movement, with guidance to pause and score rows before the Oral Defense.",{"@graph":14,"@context":65},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/scoring-approaches-summary-for-the-imp-and-oral-defense/436915/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/scoring-approaches-summary-for-the-imp-and-oral-defense/436915.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"nayy☆","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-19","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How are audience engagement and oral performance assessed?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Design is judged by the selection and emphasis of key information, the effective use of charts/pictures, and whether text or moving elements distract the audience. Performance is judged through vocal variety, clear delivery, eye contact, and purposeful gestures and posture throughout.","Answer","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":67,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":69,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":71,"site_id":7},436915,1790806855,{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":75},"success",[76,80,84,87,92,96,101,106,111,114,118],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":77,"show_sort_weight":78,"slug":79},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":81,"show_sort_weight":82,"slug":83},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},70,"exam",{"id":88,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":109,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":113},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":115,"slug":117},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":119,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":88,"slug":121},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":123},{"doc_id":71,"user_id":124,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":125,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":126,"file_id":127,"file_url":128,"file_type":129,"file_size":130,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":30,"language":131,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":132,"faqs":133,"seo_title":134,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":135,"read_time":102},962090893153,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Summary of Scoring Approaches for the Individual Multimedia Presentation and Oral Defense  \n\n| Row 1: Understand and Analyze Context |  |\n| --- | --- |\n| What to look for | Where? |\n| 1. Is the relevance of the research question made clear?(Why does the question matter? Why is it worth pursuing?)\u003Cbr>2. Is the connection to the stimulus materials clearly made? | Usually in the introduction (but stimulus material ref could be elsewhere) . |\n| Low: Very limited context, perfunctory, tenuous or non-existent connection to stimulus materials. Response offers almost nothing in the way of rationale for the question.\u003Cbr>Medium: General statements about context and relationship to stimulus materials.\u003Cbr>At the medium level there is some kind of context based rationale for the research question which may not be entirely convincing AND some link to the stimulus materials (which may not be clearly explained or convincing either).\u003Cbr>High: Relevance of the question is clear (you understand why it matters) as is the connection to the stimulus material (direct engagement with stimulus material required). Both need to be present to score 6. |  |\n| Row 2: Establish Argument |  |\n| What to look for | Where? |\n| 1. Is the argument logically organized? Does it lead you through connected claims supported by evidence?\u003Cbr>2. Does it fully explain how evidence supports the claims? | Throughout. |\n| Low: Predominantly summarize information instead of offering an argument (evidence is not connected to claims), or the argument is very weak (mostly unsubstantiated claims), or it is hard to see what the argument is because it’s not really a debatable issue.\u003Cbr>Medium: Discernable argument but may be disorganized or contain faulty reasoning.\u003Cbr>High: Convincing argument that is logically organized and fully explains how the evidence supports the claims. |  |\n| Row 3: Select and Use Evidence |  |\n| What to look for | Where? |\n| 1. Is the evidence clearly relevant? Does the presentation differentiate and evaluate the strength of evidence from sources? | Throughout |\n| 2. Is evidence brought together and integrated? (Are the pieces of |  |\n| evidence in conversation with one another?)\u003Cbr>3. Are different perspectives represented? |  |\n| IF NO EVIDENCE IS INCLUDED AT ALL, SCORES ZERO\u003Cbr>Low: Minimal range of perspectives, evidence is not used to support the argument (it is not relevant or credible, or is just summarized), or multiple examples/pieces of evidence from one single perspective.\u003Cbr>Medium: Evidence is presented, but connections between pieces of evidence are not clearly articulated, various perspectives incorporated. Quotes are dropped in without much explanation.\u003Cbr>High: Draw relevant evidence together from different perspectives (puts them in conversation with eachother) to develop and support the argument. |  |\n\n\n| Row 4: Establish Argument (Resolutions, Conclusions, Solutions) |  |\n| --- | --- |\n| What to look for | Where? |\n| 1. Does the presentation have a resolution, conclusion, or a solution? (If so, is it completely oversimplified?)\u003Cbr>2. Is the resolution, conclusion or solution realistic?\u003Cbr>3. Does the presentation consider the limitation(s) and or implication(s) of the resolution, conclusion, or solution? | Towards the end (but check for alignment with the stated question at the beginning) . |\n| Low: No resolution, conclusion or solution, or what they offer is oversimplified or unsubstantiated (or contrived because it’s a not really a debatable issue) .\u003Cbr>Medium: Specific resolutions, conclusions or solutions offered but lack detail to demonstrate plausibility or are not entirely realistic; partially address research question.\u003Cbr>High: Resolutions, conclusions or solutions are realistic and consider limitations and implications. |  |\n| Row 5: Engage Audience (Design) |  |\n| What to look for | Where? |\n| 1. Does the audience understand the argument better because the presentation contains carefully selected key information to display?\u003Cb","cbCaimb9wzWJIaAT","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimb9wzWJIaAT","pdf",114873,"English","# Scoring Approaches Summary for the IMP and Oral Defense\n## Row 1: Understand and Analyze Context\n## Row 2: Establish Argument\n## Row 3: Select and Use Evidence\n## Row 4: Establish Argument (Resolutions, Conclusions, Solutions)\n## Row 5: Engage Audience (Design)\n## Row 6: Engage Audience (Performance)\n## Oral Defense: Reflect","[{\"question\":\"How are audience engagement and oral performance assessed?\",\"answer\":\"Design is judged by the selection and emphasis of key information, the effective use of charts/pictures, and whether text or moving elements distract the audience. Performance is judged through vocal variety, clear delivery, eye contact, and purposeful gestures and posture throughout.\"}]","Scoring Approaches Summary for the IMP and Oral Defense | PDF",1790679428]