NOSB 2011 Finals Policy Briefing Rubric - SAMPLE Galveston, TX

TEAM NAME: ________________________________________ Total Team Score: 300

Room #: ____________________ Time:____________________

Maximum points per stakeholder: 35 Maximum points per team: 300 SH = stakeholder SH1 = team captain Team = Team's recommendation, but presented
by only 1 student

Categories
0 1
Did not submit Submitted after deadline OR
Submitted report, but did not
follow most of the
Ranking Score
SH
2 3 4 5 SH 2 SH 3 SH 4 SH 5 Team
1
Submitted on time, but did Submitted on time AND Submitted on time AND Followed all submission
not follow a number of the report quality is good, but report quality is very good. requirements. Report is
formatting guidelines. (i.e. there are few formatting Followed formatting formatted exactly right.

NOSB Office Scores

formatting guidelines- did not submit the issues. Reference list is guidelines with only a few
Submission

resulting in poor report testimonies as one team complete. minor errors.

quality. document) Report quality is 5 5 5 5 5 5
only adequate AND team did
not include a complete
reference list.
Policy Briefing Report

Nothing to The briefing is poorly The writing style of the The briefing is fairly well Briefing is well written . The Briefing is extremely well
grade OR Any written. Sentence structure, briefing is only fair. The drafted ( flows well), but stakeholders’ viewpoints are written. The stakeholders'
indication of grammar and/or spelling briefing could have used a lot could have used more editing clearly articulated and the views are clearly articulated
plagiarism create a document that is more editing, as there were a – there are some spelling or briefing was carefully edited in a manner that effectively
Writing Style

difficult read. number of grammar, spelling grammar issues. and is free of jargon. speaks to the correct
and/or sentence structure audience. 5 5 5 5 5 5
mistakes. There was a
tendency to use lots of
acronyms.

Nothing to Information/facts on the The briefing is weakly The stakeholders’ issue is The briefing successfully The briefing successfully
Comprehension

grade OR Any stakeholders’ issues provided developed and includes a few clearly presented, but the touches on the full breadth covers the full breadth and
indication of are inaccurate. misunderstandings of the briefing only focuses on that of the stakeholders’ issues, depth of the stakeholders’
Issue

plagiarism stakeholders’ issues. one issue and doesn’t fully but lacks depth into the primary issues. 5 5 5 5 5 5
explore the breadth of the issues.
stakeholders’ view point.

1 of 4 updated 3/3/2011
 NOSB 2011 Finals Policy Briefing Rubric - SAMPLE Galveston, TX

Ranking Score
Categories SH
0 1 2 3 4 5 SH 2 SH 3 SH 4 SH 5 Team
1

Policy judges Score

Nothing to The narrative is a list of The narrative attempts to Most of the key issues The key issues addressed are The key issues addressed are
grade OR Any issues and does not argue the argue the stakeholders provided are backed by facts, mostly backed with strong backed with strong facts and
Impact/ Persuasiveness

indication of viewpoints of the viewpoint, but does not
plagiarism stakeholder. effectively backup the views
with facts AND did not use
visuals OR the visual aids
selected are not relevant
and/or did not reinforce the
stakeholders’ viewpoint.
Policy Briefing Report
but most of the arguments
aren’t very strong or
convincing. Visual aids are
relevant; however, the visual
aids did not effectively or
strongly reinforce the
stakeholders’ viewpoint.
and convincing
facts/arguments. Visual aids
are appropriate, and utilized
well, but were not always
necessary to reinforce the
stakeholders point.
appropriate arguments.
Visual aids are relevant, well
used and are effective in
helping to reinforce the 5 5 5 5 5 5
stakeholders’ viewpoint. It is
difficult to not want to side
100% with this stakeholder's
views.

Nothing to Did not provide specific Made a specific Made a specific Made a specific Made a specific
grade OR Any recommendation on what recommendation on what recommendation on what recommendation on what recommendation on what
indication of Congress should do with the Congress should do with the Congress should do with the Congress should do with the Congress should do with the
plagiarism policy OR made a policy, but did not provide policy AND provided some policy and provided a strong policy and provided a strong
Recommendations

recommendation that did not
match the stakeholders’
views
any additional information on
how Congress could improve
or modify the bill to better
serve the stakeholders’
position.
information on how
Congress could improve or
modify the bill to better serve
the stakeholders’ position.
set of suggestions for how
Congress could improve or
modify the bill to better serve
the stakeholder's position.
set of suggestions for how
Congress could improve or
modify the bill that also took 5 5 5 5 5 5
into consideration other
stakeholders’ parallel
viewpoints in order to
strengthen their point.

Student Sub-Total Report Scores (scores from pages 1 &2) 25 25 25 25 25 25

Policy Briefing Report Sub-Total 150

2 of 4 updated 3/3/2011
 NOSB 2011 Finals
Categories
0 1
Did not present The presenter appears
unprepared as if s/he had
little to do with the
Oral Presentation (Style & Delivery)
development of the briefing
and/or final
recommendation. Struggles
to read the testimony OR ad-
libs presentation because
s/he forgot to bring a copy
of the testimony.
Congressional Testimony
Did not present Team runs out of time
preventing all of the
stakeholders AND/OR the
final recommendation from
being given.
Time
Student Sub-Total Testimony Score Scores (sub total from pg 3 only)
Individual Student Report & Testimony Score (sub total from pages 2 & 3)
2 3
Reads the testimony, but
stumbles over a number of
sentences or thoughts. It is
obvious the presenter is very
nervous – uses a lot of verbal
fillers and/or speaks much
too quickly or quietly. Reads
from the presentation, but
forgets to reference the visual
aids.
The entire team presents and
gives their final
recommendations, but half of
the team is really rushed;
some team members don't
complete their entire
stakeholder testimony
because other team members
went overtime.
Policy Briefing Rubric - SAMPLE
Ranking
Reads the presentation fairly
well, with only a few
stumbles. Uses some fillers
that are noticeable, but not
distracting. Speaks a little too
quickly OR too quietly.
Remembers to discuss the
visual aids, but doesn’t
engage the judges in the
process. May or may not do a
good job in effectively
making the connection
between the issue and the
visual aid.
All elements are presented,
but some of the team
members have to talk a little
quickly to ensure there is
enough time. OR The team
finishes their presentation
with more than a minute
remaining in the 11 minute
block.
3 of 4
Galveston, TX
Score
SH
4 5 SH 2 SH 3 SH 4 SH 5 Team
1
Does a nice job reading the Does an excellent job reading
presentation. Uses very few the presentation. Doesn’t use
verbal fillers. Has a nice verbal fillers. Has a nice
speech pattern and is able to speaking voice and speech
adjust his/her voice for the pattern that keeps the
room. Remembers to audience engaged. Does an
reference the visual aids at exceptional job of
the appropriate time and referencing the visual aids
engages the judges in the and ensures that judges see 5 5 5 5 5 5
process. connections between visuals
and the points being made.
Policy Judges Score
Entire team does a nice job Entire team presents
presenting without being extremely well – stays within
rushed or too short, but they the timeframe AND
do not transition well effectively transitions
between each presentation. between each presenter.
5 5 5 5 5 5
10 10 10 10 10 10
35 35 35 35 35 35
updated 3/3/2011
 NOSB 2011 Finals Policy Briefing Rubric - SAMPLE Galveston, TX

Category Ranking Questions

0 6 12 18 24 30 Q1 Q2 Q3
Did not answer The team is not prepared and Overall the response is very The response is fairly well The team worked well The team did an excellent job
the question OR does not answer the question basic and only provides the thought-out, but appears to together to provide a providing a very strong
conferred on the with an appropriate answer. most common knowledge be entirely developed and comprehensive answer that comprehensive answer that
Congressional Testimony

answer after the type of information. presented by only one or two showcased additional analysis included a lot of additional

Policy judges Score

Q&A Session

"discussion team members OR the team and/or critical thought. analysis and critical thought.
period" had appears not to be entirely Answer was presented 30 30 30
ended. confident in their response. eloquently and with
confidence.

Team Q&A Score 90

Total Team Score 300

4 of 4 updated 3/3/2011