Post performance reflection

Exam Content &
Question Structure

Reflection Points

• Time spent studying

• Style/variety of studying

• Study Environment

• Content Studied

• Notes & Materials

Study Habits & Preparation

Reflection Points

• Level of Understanding

• Content studied

• Question Type

• Question Design

Test-Taking Mistakes

Reflection Points

• Instructions

• Reading the Question

• Test Taking Skills

Time Management, Accommodations, & Performance Under Pressure

Reflection Points

• Amount of time

• Time allocation

• Mindset

• Accommodations

Topic Choice

Poor

• did not address the assignment

• inappropriate for the occasion

• irrelevant to the audience or segments of the audience

Better

• addressed the assignment but did not translate well into a presentation

• addressed the audience’s needs but missed their interests

Ideal

• addressed the assignment in a novel and engaging way

• relevant to the audience’s needs and interests

Introduction

Poor

• did not grab the audience’s attention

• did not establish speaker credibility

• did not include a clear thesis or preview main points

Better

• included a hook that did not match the presentation topic (e.g., an irrelevant joke)

• did not clearly establish speaker credibility

• implied a thesis and main points

Ideal

• grabbed the audience’s attention with a relevant hook (e.g., an anecdote or statistic)

• established speaker credibility

• included a clear thesis statement

• previewed main points

Main Body

Poor

• no logical order to the main points

• insufficient support for the points

• poor or missing transitions between points

Better

• points needed clarity; ordered but not in the most logical way

• citations were present but wrong/unclear

• transitions between main points were weak

Ideal

• points were clear and logically-ordered

• all points were well-supported

• all sources were documented

• each point had clear transitions

Conclusion

Poor

• failed to restate the thesis/main points

• left audience hanging

Better

• restated thesis

• reviewed main points

• brought closure but didn’t connect to the bigger picture

Ideal

• restated thesis

• reviewed main points

• brought closure

• gave the audience something to do or think about beyond the presentation

Bodly Language

Poor

• little or no eye contact

• gestures lacked variety and were inappropriate to the audience

• did not interact with the audience

Better

• some eye contact

• gestures/posture/facial expressions were appropriate but seemed forced

• minimal interaction with the audience (e.g., only during Q&A)

Ideal

• consistent eye contact

• gestures/posture/facial expressions were appropriate and enhanced the message

• interacted with the audience throughout

Poor

• not well-integrated or not present when required

• too many words/irrelevant graphics

Better

• integrated but not smoothly

• relevant to the main point, but included distracting animations

• too many words or irrelevant graphics

Ideal

• integrated smoothly and skillfully

• enhanced the presentation by reinforcing and extending main points

• used helpful (minimal) animations

Delivery and Preparation

Poor

• did not practice ahead of time

• mumbled or couldn’t be understood

• read off the slides

• significantly over or under the allotted time

• did not use speaker notes

Better

• practiced by yourself

• spoke clearly/distinctly most of the time

• relied on information on the slides

• stayed close to the allotted time

• wrote out the entire presentation and read off the script

Ideal

• practiced by yourself

• spoke clearly/distinctly most of the time

• relied on information on the slides

• stayed close to the allotted time

• wrote out the entire presentation and read off the script

Topic

Poor

• wrote on too many/too few topics

• wrote off-topic (e.g., analyzed instead of described)

Better

• wrote on the number of topics requested

• stayed on topic but did not draw in many class concepts

Ideal

• integrated the requested topics

• showed knowledge of class concepts through chosen topics

Time Management

Poor

• did not budget time for brainstorming/planning, writing, and proofreading

Better

• budgeted time but did not stick to the limits 

Ideal

• budgeted time and stuck to allotted limits, even if that meant cutting off to proofread 

Brainstorming & Management

Poor

• jumped straight into writing without brainstorming or planning

• did not consider supporting information

Better

• brainstormed but did not write out a plan

• drew in some supporting info but maybe not in the best places

Ideal

• used the last two blue book pages/scrap paper to brainstorm and jot down an outline

• drew in relevant supporting information

Content

Poor

• jumped straight into the body paragraphs without an intro

• answered with too much or too little writing

• did not include a conclusion

Better

• intro was vague

• stayed close to the amount of writing needed to answer the question, but meandered a little

• concluded abruptly

Ideal

• intro included thesis and main points

• used only the space that was needed to answer the question

• concluded with a sentence or two to restate the main idea/points

Editing & Proof Reading

Poor

• turned in essay without proofreading 

Better

• checked quickly for glaring spelling errors 

Ideal

• reviewed for fully answering the prompt

• checked points/evidence

• checked flow and added transitions