# Friendship Debate Rubric This rubric is designed to evaluate student performance during the Friendship Debate. Students will be assessed on how well they adhere to the discussion guidelines, communicate their ideas, and engage with diverse perspectives. Use this tool to understand strengths and areas for improvement. --- ## Scoring Levels - **Emerging (1 point):** Limited demonstration of the expected behaviors and skills. The performance may lack clarity, evidence, or respectful interaction. - **Developing (2 points):** Basic demonstration of skills though inconsistencies are evident. Some evidence of clear communication and respectful interaction, but room for improvement. - **Proficient (3 points):** Solid demonstration of skills. Communication is clear, supported by evidence and personal experiences, with consistent respectful interactions. - **Exemplary (4 points):** Masterful demonstration of skills. Communication is persuasive, well-structured, and enriched by diverse perspectives, supported by strong evidence and consistently respectful interactions. --- ## Criteria ### 1. Respectful Communication - **Emerging (1):** Rarely listens to peers; interruptions are frequent; language might be dismissive or disrespectful. - **Developing (2):** Sometimes listens and responds respectfully, but may require reminders to maintain decorum; may occasionally interrupt. - **Proficient (3):** Actively listens, speaks respectfully, and follows debate guidelines; demonstrates sensitivity to diverse viewpoints. - **Exemplary (4):** Consistently respectful and empathetic; promotes inclusive dialogue and encourages quieter peers; contributes to a positive debate environment.
### 2. Clarity and Organization - **Emerging (1):** Ideas are unclear or disorganized; arguments lack a clear structure and are hard to follow. - **Developing (2):** Ideas are somewhat clear but might lack organization; arguments are presented but could benefit from clearer structure. - **Proficient (3):** Ideas are clearly expressed and well-organized; arguments are logically structured and easy to follow. - **Exemplary (4):** Ideas are communicated in a compelling, well-organized manner; arguments are seamlessly structured with excellent transitions that strengthen persuasion.
### 3. Use of Evidence and Personal Experiences - **Emerging (1):** Provides little to no evidence or personal experience; opinions are unsupported and unfocused. - **Developing (2):** Uses some evidence or personal experiences, though examples may be general or loosely connected to the argument. - **Proficient (3):** Effectively integrates evidence and personal experiences to support key points; examples are relevant and strengthen the argument. - **Exemplary (4):** Uses compelling and varied evidence, including detailed personal experiences; examples are highly relevant and greatly enhance the overall argument.
### 4. Engagement and Collaboration - **Emerging (1):** Minimal participation; shows little engagement with the debate; limited collaboration with peers. - **Developing (2):** Participates but may be passive or inconsistent; makes minimal effort to engage with peers or extend the conversation. - **Proficient (3):** Regularly participates and engages in the debate; responds to peers thoughtfully and contributes to collaborative discussion. - **Exemplary (4):** Actively drives the debate; facilitates dialogue among peers, asks insightful questions, and fosters an inclusive environment for all voices to be heard. --- ## Scoring Summary For each criterion, assign the corresponding points (1-4) based on the student's performance. Sum the points from each category to determine the overall performance level. Use this feedback to help students understand both their strengths and areas for growth in future debates.

diane.cardell

1 Lessons

Friendship Debate: Valuing Different Perspectives

diane.cardell

1 Lessons

Friendship Debate: Valuing Different Perspectives