Seminar Evaluation

4%

Speech. Clarity, volume, grammar, confidence.

4%

Visual aids. Clarity, use of pictures or diagrams, too many overheads, too few?

6%

Structure. Did the seminar have a coherent logical structure? Did the presentation flow naturally from topic to topic (good) or jump around (bad)?

6%

Questions. How well were questions from the audience handled?

4%

Background. Quality of the summary of relevant background material and related work. For an expert in the area, how well the important previous work was covered in summary form. For a non-expert, whether the information was presented so that the rest of the seminar could understand.

4%

Analysis. Quality of the description of the problem and the objectives of the project. The description should be clear and it should be obvious what the project is aiming to achieve.

12%

Solution. Quality of the solution description and, for people who know the area, correctness and appropriateness of the solution approach. Was all of the information about the problem solution itself described in sufficient detail? Is the methodology sound? Is the solution original? E.g., Was the structure of a software implementation described appropriately? Were all of the important algorithms outlined? Were proof strategies described? Was the progress to date summarised?