Research Defense Evaluation Form

RESEARCH TITLE

NAMES OF RESEARCH GROUP MEMBERS

DATE OF DEFENSE TIME OF DEFENSE STI CAMPUS

NAME OF PANELIST SIGNATURE OF PANELIST

GROUP GRADE (60%)

RESEARCH PAPER
CRITERIA PERFORMANCE INDICATORS POINTS SCORE
Background of the Provides an excellent description of the research and
Study and Literature synthesis of information from relevant journal articles; has 20
Review properly cited all references.
Theoretical/Conceptual Defines the specific viewpoint of the research; describes
20
Framework the relationship between the main concepts of the study.
Data Analysis/ Provides a detailed analysis of data gathered and gives a
30
Discussion of Findings recommendation based on concepts learned.
TOTAL 70

FINAL DEFENSE PRESENTATION

CRITERIA PERFORMANCE INDICATORS POINTS SCORE
Holds attention of the entire audience using direct eye
contact; seldom looks at notes and speaks with variation in
Delivery 10
volume and modulation to maintain audience interest and
emphasize key points.
Able to present the ideas clearly; gives pertinent examples,
Organization of ideas facts, and/or statistics; supports conclusions/ideas with 10
evidence.
Able to answer the panel’s questions; able to convince the
Effectiveness 10
panelists of the ideas being presented.
TOTAL 30

▪▪▪
RESEARCH DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM| FT-CRD-115-00 | PAGE 1 OF 4
 Research Defense Evaluation Form

INDIVIDUAL GRADE (40%)

Write the number that corresponds to the presenters’ performance. Use the rating scale below:
Rating Description
4 - Excellent
3 - Exceeds expectations
2 - Meets expectations
1 - Meets expectations sometimes
0 - Does not meet expectations

STUDENT 2

STUDENT 4
STUDENT 1

STUDENT 3
NAME OF GROUP MEMBERS

I. Communication Skills
Voice Projection (Distance reached)
Voice Modulation (Pleasantness of voice)
Diction/Pronunciation
Grammar/Syntax; Understandability
II. Work Organization
Preparedness
Ability to present the assigned topic(s) clearly
Participation in the defense
III. Effectiveness
Ability to answer questions
Ability to convince the panelists of the ideas being presented
RATING = [Total Score ÷ 36 × 100]

SUMMARY OF RATINGS
Group Grade
Individual Total Remarks
Names of Group Members Research Oral Grade Rating (PASS or FAIL)
Paper Presentation

▪▪▪
RESEARCH DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM| FT-CRD-115-00 | PAGE 2 OF 4
 Research Defense Evaluation Form

REVISIONS LIST
The following revisions need to be complied with by the Research Group. Further evaluation of the research
paper will be done depending on the indicated result below.

RESEARCH PAGE
LIST OF REVISIONS
PART/CHAPTER NUMBER

▪▪▪
RESEARCH DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM| FT-CRD-115-00 | PAGE 3 OF 4
 Research Defense Evaluation Form

RECOMMENDATION
 PASS

o
 With revisions to be checked by the Research Adviser
o
 With revisions to be checked by the Research Panelists
*Revisions needed to be complied with are in the Revision List (Research Defense Evaluation Form).
 RE-DEFENSE
 Fail**
**Indicate the names of students who failed (No listing means all members of the group):
Students Reason(s) for Failure Signature

**Reason(s) for Failure (As a group):

 Incompleteness of the output
 Incorrectness of the output
 Non-original (copied from existing sources)
 Output(s)/Deliverable(s) were made by individuals other than members of the group
 Others
(specify):

**Condition(s) of Failure/Actions for Failed Defense:

 Change the entire research by submitting a new proposal for approval
 Continue working on the same topic, including the necessary revisions and requirements
 Others
(specify):

▪▪▪
RESEARCH DEFENSE EVALUATION FORM| FT-CRD-115-00 | PAGE 4 OF 4