LIDE Learning Center, Inc.
6539 Isabel Leyte
“critical minds, caring heart, serving hands”
RESEARCH RUBRICS FOR ORAL DEFENSE
Title of the Study: ___________________________________________________________________
Researchers: _______________________________________________________________________
Date of Oral Presentation: ____________________
Directions: Analyze the research output based on the following criteria below. Check the appropriate column (5
as the highest and 1 as the lowest) indicating your evaluation.
INTRODUCTION
Indicators
1. The introduction consists of an adequate introductory discussion of the problem.
2. Relevant factors leading to the problem are well discussed.
3. Conceptual framework adequately supports the main problem or the title of the
study.
4. The gap of knowledge of the study is clearly and specifically stated to convince the
readers of the need to conduct the study.
5. The aims/purpose or objectives were thoroughly presented.
5
4
3
2
1
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
LITERATURE REVIEW
Indicators
5
1. Cited literature and studies are adequate and relevant to the research problem.
2. Foreign literature, studies, local studies are present.
3. Synthesis of the reviewed literature and studies is well-organized, concise (not too
long nor too short) and is based on the researchers’ logical analysis of the cited materials.
4. The sources of the cited literatures and studies are appropriately acknowledged and/or
cited.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD
Indicators
1. The research methodology is well-described and is suitable or fitting to the research
problem.
2. The participants of the study are well-described in terms of the sample profile,
sample size, and sampling technique and/or procedure.
3. The research locale/environment is described in terms of its location, historical
background, purposes, and objectives and/or mission and vision of the instruction or
organization.
4. The procedure and/or techniques of gathering data are explained in complete detail
beginning from the time the researchers sought permission to the conduct of the study.
5. The research design and method employed by the researchers are correct and
relevant to the fulfillment of the accurate results of the study.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Indicators
1. Tables and figures are clear, accurate, and appropriately formatted.
2. Data analysis is thorough, accurate, and uses appropriate statistical tools.
3. Interpretations are objective, supported by data, and address the research questions.
4. Implications of the findings are clearly discussed and related back to the research
problem.
5. Discussion connects findings to the literature.
6. Results are verifiable from the data and directly address the research gap/title.
CONCLUSION
Indicators
1. Conclusion is drawn appropriately from the findings of the study through a
generalization.
2. The conclusion of the study is logically presented and written by the researchers.
3. The conclusion capsulate the entire research endeavors and answers the aims of the
study.
4. Conclusion is not just merely repetition of their findings.
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
RECOMMENDATIONS
Indicators
1. Recommendations are presented concisely and clearly.
2. Recommendations are directly relevant to the study's findings and conclusions.
3. Recommendations are specific, actionable, and feasible.
4. Recommendations offer practical and impactful solutions.
PRESENTATION / DEFENSE
Indicators
1. Maintained exceptional composure, exhibited confidence and professionalism throughout.
2. Presentation was clear, concise, and precise.
3. Excellent articulation and delivery; clear, confident, and engaging voice.
4. Presentation was exceptionally well-organized and logically structured.
5. Responded to all questions with confidence, accuracy, and insightful elaboration.
6. Demonstrated in-depth of knowledge and insightful analysis.
7. Demonstrated a deep understanding of the research and its implications, demonstrating critical
thinking and problem-solving skills.
REMARKS:
☐ Passed
☐ Failed
OVERALL TOTAL: ______
_____ without revision
_____ with minor revision
_____ with major revision
_____ rejected
_______________________________
Signature over Name of Panelist
Date: _____________________
Noted by:
JOSHUA C. BALUNAN
Research Teacher
CHRISTOPHER LLOYD E. MAGTIBAY
Research Teacher