M.

Cross Debate Rubric Name: ____________________________

Block: _________
Criteria 1 2 3 4

Organization and Clarity: Viewpoints and responses Viewpoints and responses Viewpoints and responses Viewpoints and responses are
are mostly illogical or are attempted but lack are mostly clear and exceptionally clear and fluidly
unclear. Connections are fluidity; clarity and proficiently ordered ordered.
vague and scattered connections between points
are inconsistent

Use of Arguments, Examples Argumentative statements Argumentative statements Argumentative statements Argumentative statements are
and Facts: are simple or incomplete; are briefly developed are logically presented expertly presented and
Ideas are poorly Uses some relevant and developed; developed;
SExI points (Statement, supported/illustrated; evidence to illustrate Central issues are clearly Intellectual analysis of issue is
Explanation, Illustration) are Case studies may be poorly argument but explained; speech clearly established through
provided to support chosen and/or irrelevant, comprehension of effectively simplifies key critical thinking; Addresses
may rely heavily on evidence/studies may seem aspects of argument; variables in statement and
anecdotes inconsistent; Case studies are well- successfully breaks down
arguments/support may be chosen and analogy well complexities;
repetitive utilized Focus of illustrating points rely
on case studies and Analogy;
Anecdotes may have been
successfully attempted

Use of Rebuttal/Refutation: Ineffective, little or no Rebuttal is attempted, but Rebuttal is mostly Rebuttal is specific to
refutation. Is confused few effective counter- effective and addresses arguments made in the opposing
easily by opponent and may arguments are made; most arguments made by team’s opening statement;
not reconstruct argument; points made may not all opposing team; engages Expertly reconstructs his/her
does not engage opponent address opponent’s opponent team’s argument; skillfully
arguments; at times debate engages with or “clashes
may seem like “passing with” opponent; may use both
ships in the night” implicit and explicit refutation

Language Style: Student language style is Student sometimes Student has a clear sense of Student has a palpable sense of
choppy and does not conveys a sense of audience audience; effectively uses audience; expertly uses
reflect a sense of audience. but frequently incorporates rhetorical devices; may rhetorical devices of speech
colloquialisms; speech occasionally incorporate an writing; language seems to have
may frequently incorporate “um” or “like” but it is not a flawless fluidity
“ums” and “likes”; may distracting
unsuccessfully attempt
rhetorical devices.

Presentation Style: Few or no style features Some style features were Most style features were Many or all style features were
were used. Not convincing. used convincingly. used convincingly. used convincingly.
tone of voice, use of gestures,
level of enthusiasm