Assessment Guidelines

This will be fit to a rubric with each category assigned X.X / 10.0 points for 40 points total.
Creativity is encouraged, however orators may not use audio-visual equipment during the presentation.

1. Rhetorical presence: the speech’s rhetorical efficacy 
    Specific criteria:
        -Rooted in place
              How does the orator connect to Charlestonian-ness?
              Is experiential subjectivity employed?

-Tone: uniting, hopeful, action-oriented
      Does the orator’s rhetoric serve a larger goal of uniting humanity?

-Original thought
      Is the orator’s creative capacity clear?
      When necessary, are others’ ideas appropriately recognized?

-Time Restraints
       (penalized for being outside of 5-9 minutes)

 2. Problem:  the argument’s ability to diagnose a problem 
      Specific criteria: 
         - Carefully identified and described 
              When identifying the problem, how comprehensively considered is its description?

         - Connection with addressing marginalization, equity, and justice
               How clear is this problem’s connection to systematized inequality?

         - Voice: emphatic of lived experience
               In the problem’s diagnosis, are there fair representations of those
               most intimately affected by its persistence?

 3. Solution 
     Specific criteria: 
         - Systems and institutional thinking  
              How well does the proposed solution interrupt systematized, unfair transferal of power?
              Does institutional and social progress remain in the foreground?

 - Identification of an ideal
      When thinking about the larger direction and importance of this proposal,
      is it clear to see where this might lead us towards an ideal world?

          - Realistic
              To what degree is this a realistic solution? How well does it connect to the problem’s diagnosis?
              How likely is this proposal motivate a critical mass and effectively employ institutional resources?
              Does the proposal reconcile with 
institutional realities and/or regional political trends?

          - Evidence-based argument
              Does this proposal employ facts to address the problem?

 4.  Connectivity and Sustainability: how the proposal works as a whole
      Specific criteria: 
          - Connection with Charleston (with potential for broader implication) 
              How does this problem affect Charleston?
              How does it relate to the College?

          - Momentum and life beyond the College
               How dynamic and adaptable are the proposed steps?
               Is the solution inherently heuristic?

          - Innovative and entrepreneurial in nature
               Does the orator creatively and bravely address the problem?

          - Effectively enters a larger discussion of access, equality, and oppression
               What characterizes the scope and importance of this proposal?
               What is the larger meaning of the solution for humanity?


Sturcken Oratorical Logo