Hmmm, Evaluations are much more standardized in Pathways than in “old” T education program.
Those details are covered in other posts here
But one issue makes me scratch my head…. The standard scoring/grading criteria that moves from feedback about the presentation to feedback about … The Person
For example, examine the scoring criteria for “Clarity:” which appears exactly the same on over 90% of the 60 or so Pathways projects
Clarity:Â Spoken language is clear and is easily understood (evaluator is to select 123,4, or 5)
5 â€“ Is an exemplary public speaker who is alwaysÂ understood
4 â€“ Excels at communicating using the spoken word
3 â€“ Spoken language is clear and is easily understood
2 â€“ Spoken language is somewhat unclear orÂ challenging to understand
1 â€“ Spoken language is unclear or not easily understood
5 and 4 are about the person not the presentation. I guess these would never be applied to a new member or icebreaker ?
or what exactly does “always” mean? Is it supposed to mean “always in this speech” or is the evaluator supposed to have experience with this speaker before this presentation?