Please return to the speaker
Ohio Pharmacy Residency Conference Presentation Evaluation Form
Presentation Title: ____________________________________________________________________________________________
Speaker:_________________________________________Institution:__________________________________________________
Grading Rubric
1: Not Accomplished 2: Needs Development 3: Acceptable 4: Mostly Accomplished 5: Accomplished
Speaker Evaluation
Points earned
Comments
The speaker maintained appropriate eye contact throughout the
presentation.
1 2 3 4 5
The presenter spoke in a strong voice at an appropriate pace
throughout the presentation.
1 2 3 4 5
The slides were visually appealing, easy to read, and contained no
spelling errors.
1 2 3 4 5
The speaker was clearly knowledgeable on the topic presented.
1 2 3 4 5
The speaker actively engaged the audience in this learning activity.
1 2 3 4 5
The speaker adequately answered questions and provided
clarification when necessary.
1 2 3 4 5
It was evident that the resident had direct and substantial
involvement in the project/study.
1 2 3 4 5
The presentation was unbiased and provided a fair balance of
information. Specific products were referred to by a generic or
chemical name and the speaker did not appear to be promoting a
product or company.
1 2 3 4 5
Quality of Presentation
Points earned
Comments
The program was organized and presented in a logical fashion.
1 2 3 4 5
The knowledge gained at this program will be applicable to my daily
practice.
1 2 3 4 5
The program met my expectations based on the learned objectives.
1 2 3 4 5
Overall, I gained new information and knowledge on the subject
presented.
1 2 3 4 5
The program subject and degree of detail were appropriate for the
audience.
1 2 3 4 5
The program subject and degree of detail were appropriate for the
time allotted.
1 2 3 4 5
Presentation Content
Points earned
Comments
The presentation topic was current and relevant to the practice of
pharmacy.
1 2 3 4 5
Specific and measurable learning objectives were stated.
1 2 3 4 5
The purpose of the study/project was clearly stated.
1 2 3 4 5
Study/project methods were clearly stated and appropriately applied
to the given topic.
1 2 3 4 5
Results (or preliminary results) were provided and discussed in
sufficient detail.
1 2 3 4 5
Stated conclusions were appropriate given the design, results, and
current practice standards.
1 2 3 4 5
Time frame was appropriate (18 - 22 minutes).
YES
NO
Reviewer’s Name:_____________________________________________Reviewer’s Specialty: __________________________________________
Session Code: _________________________________________
