Name Presenter

Name Reviewer

Clarity/relevance of research question, Quality of background information, Appropriateness of methods, Significance of results and conclusions. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good Clarity/relevance of research question, Quality of background information, Appropriateness of methods, Significance of results and conclusions. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good 1 2 3 4 5

Clarity/organization of the presentation, Usage of slides, Kept within time, Engaging delivery. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good Clarity/organization of the presentation, Usage of slides, Kept within time, Engaging delivery. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good 1 2 3 4 5

Understanding of the topic, Ability to answer questions. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good Understanding of the topic, Ability to answer questions. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good 1 2 3 4 5

Originality of the research, Potential implications and significance of the findings. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good Originality of the research, Potential implications and significance of the findings. 1=unacceptable, 2=weak, 3=moderate, 4=good, 5=very good 1 2 3 4 5