Graduate Assessment: Oral Evaluations for the Integrated M.A./Ph.D.Program in Spanish and Portuguese

Indicates required field

This form is used to evaluate the following graduate LEARNING GOAL #1:

  • Students should demonstrate the critical thinking and analytical skills necessary to formulate sophisticated, well-organized, and well-supported arguments both orally and in writing.

Use of Rubric
The rubric will be used by advisors during three oral evaluation events in the Integrated M.A./Ph.D. Program for Spanish and Portuguese: the Research/M.A. paper presentation at the end of the second year, the oral portion of the candidacy exam, and the oral portion of the dissertation exam. 

Please fill out the following fields and use the rubric below to evaluate the student.

Please rate the student on a scale of 1 to 4 using the descriptions below.
4 - Consistently does all or almost all of the following:
  • Accurately interprets evidence.
  • Identifies the salient arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
  • Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view.
  • Draws warranted, judicious, non-fallacious conclusions.
  • Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons.
  • Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
3 - Does most or many of the following:
  • Accurately interprets evidence.
  • Identifies relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
  • Offers analyses and evaluations of obvious alternative points of view.
  • Draws warranted, judicious, non-fallacious conclusions.
  • Justifies some results or procedures, explains reasons.
  • Fairmindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
2 - Does most or many of the following:
  • Misinterprets evidence.
  • Fails to identify strong, relevant counter-arguments.
  • Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.
  • Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons.
  • Regardless of the evidence or reasons maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.
1 - Consistently does all or almost all of the following:
  • Offers biased interpretations of evidence or the points of view of others.
  • Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counter-arguments.
  • Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.
  • Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons, and unwarranted claims.
  • Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.
  • Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason.

If you have any questions, please contact Ana Del-Sarto.