UROP Presentation Rubric
All UROP Presentation applications are reviewed by members of the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Council (UROC) and/or ad hoc faculty reviewers from UHM based on the criteria shown in the UROP Presentation Rubric below. Once the application evaluation and scoring are complete, the sum of all scores will be divided by 6 (the total number of criteria) to create a score on a 4.0 scale. All required components must be included for application funding consideration.
Criterion/Score | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
Abstract / Significance | The abstract is clear and understandable to those outside the field | The abstract is sufficiently clear and understandable to those outside the field | The abstract is somewhat clear and understandable to those outside the field | The abstract is not clear and understandable to those outside the field | No Abstract / Significance |
Rationale for Conference/Event/etc.
| Rationale for the value of participation is clear | Rationale for the value of participation is sufficient | Rationale for the value of participation is insufficient | Rationale for the value of participation is poor | No Rationale for conference / event / etc. |
Applicant’s Role | Applicant’s role will clearly facilitate a positive learning outcome | Applicant’s role will sufficiently facilitate a positive learning outcome | Applicant’s role will somewhat facilitate a positive learning outcome | Applicant’s role will not facilitate a positive learning outcome | No Applicant’s Role |
Budget | Projected items and expenses are clearly justified | Projected items and expenses are sufficiently justified | Projected items and expenses are somewhat justified | Projected items and expenses are not justified | No Budget |
Presentation Recommendation Form | Evaluations clearly show mentor’s support of the student and reflect high quality of the proposed presentation | Evaluations sufficiently show mentor’s support of the student and reflect good quality of the proposed presentation | Evaluations somewhat show mentor’s support of the student and reflect moderate quality of the proposed presentation | Evaluations do not show mentor’s support of the student and reflect poor quality of the proposed presentation | No Presentation Evaluation |
GPA | The scoring for grade-point average utilizes the 4.0 scale for the applicant’s cumulative academic record, including all transfer credits. | ||||