Rachel Whittle

Web Seminar Critiques
Home
About Me
Tech Activities
Biology 3920

Enter subhead content here

SEMINAR EVALUATION

Presenter's Name: Mary C.  Berkerle_____________________

Title of Presentation: Adhesion Signaling and Cancer                                 

Date: July 2007____________

Categories of Evaluation: Maximum of 10-points [%] for each category.

I. Content: Completeness, creativity, and effectiveness.

1. Title, Author, & Address [Biol. Dept., Tenn. Tech. Univ.,Cookeville, TN. zip]

10 

2. Introduction [Literature references/cited?]

 10

3. Objective/Hypothesis [Null?] Statements [Clearly stated?]

 10

4. Methods & Materials [Literature reference to methods used; Statistics/cited?]

 10

5. Results & Discussion [Results agree/disagree with literature/cited? Tables/Figures?]

 10

6. Conclusions [Is take-home-message clear? Was Null Hypothesis Rejected?]

 10

I I. Style:

7. Visual Aids [Colors/contrast; images/pics of research set-up?]

 10

8. Organization of Material [Includes recommended slides/sections?]

 10

9. Clarity of Presentations [Eye contact; has it been practiced?]

 10

10. Professionalism [Mannerism, dress, confidence?]

 10

                                                                                                                            TOTAL

 100

Note: Null Hypothesis rejected; alternative Hypothesis accepted? Yes_________

Evaluator: Rachel Whittle______________________________

 

 

 

SEMINAR EVALUATION

Presenter's Name: Martin Raff______________________________

Title of Presentation: Growth Control in Animal Development  

Date: November 2006_________

Categories of Evaluation: Maximum of 10-points [%] for each category.

I. Content: Completeness, creativity, and effectiveness.

1. Title, Author, & Address [Biol. Dept., Tenn. Tech. Univ.,Cookeville, TN. zip]

 10

2. Introduction [Literature references/cited?]

 10

3. Objective/Hypothesis [Null?] Statements [Clearly stated?]

 10

4. Methods & Materials [Literature reference to methods used; Statistics/cited?]

 10

5. Results & Discussion [Results agree/disagree with literature/cited? Tables/Figures?]

 10

6. Conclusions [Is take-home-message clear? Was Null Hypothesis Rejected?]

 10

I I. Style:

7. Visual Aids [Colors/contrast; images/pics of research set-up?]

 10

8. Organization of Material [Includes recommended slides/sections?]

 10

9. Clarity of Presentations [Eye contact; has it been practiced?]

 10

10. Professionalism [Mannerism, dress, confidence?]

 10

                                                                                                                            TOTAL

 100

Note: Null Hypothesis rejected; alternative Hypothesis accepted? yes_______________

Evaluator: Rachel Whittle_________________________________

 

Enter supporting content here