Pitch Reflection Memo Rubric – Dr. H. Love – F25 – ENGL 192
ENGL 192: Pitch Reflection Memo Rubric
Assessment Categories (and point values) for the Pitch Reflection Memo:
Overall grading scale for first three categories below:
A – A+
B – AC – BF–D
Thorough, thoughtful, and useful comments for all prompts
Thoughtful comments for most prompts, though some may lack detail
Comments for most prompts, though some likely seem to lack depth of thought and/or detail
Missing comments for one or more prompts
•
(15) Reflection on how the presentation went
o Consider: timing, ability to communicate the main points you wanted to convey,
interaction with your handout, comfort level while speaking
o Include: something you’re most happy about/proud of, AND something you want to
improve on for the Showcase presentation, which will also involve a fairly “informal” set
of interactions and conversations with the audience
(15) Reflection on how the discussion went
o Include a discussion of: how did what you plan to write about for the symposium
presentation/report BEFORE the presentation compare to AFTER the presentation? What
do you know now that you didn’t know before the presentation, in terms of what you
think you’d like to focus on for the report?
o Identify/Explain: Who provided the most helpful comment(s), what were they, and why
were they helpful? *identify at least one person by name!
o Include a response to: What was successful with your discussion preparation AND what
will you do differently the next time you need to lead a brainstorming session for a
project that’s important to you, professionally?
(10) Plans
o What topics/ideas/aspects of your tech do you need to research now?
o How can you contribute to a positive/productive team dynamic over the next few weeks?
o How will you hold yourself accountable to these goals during the next 2 weeks?
o What questions do you have for Dr. Love about the next phase of the project?
(5) Organization, (Memo) Formatting, and (Document) Design – see Proposal rubric for details
(5) Technical Writing Mechanics – see Proposal rubric for details
•
•
•
•
Memo formatting is incorrect or
improperly applied. Headings may
be illogical or inconsistent. Design is
not effective and/or may detract
from professionalism.
Either too short (to cover all
required elements) or too long. May
include inappropriate tone and
word choices. Paragraphs likely
underdeveloped.
Numerous grammatical errors are
present and likely impede
comprehension, and/or writing may
be overly wordy.
Memo formatting used; some
elements missing or incomplete.
Headings mostly logical, but not
parallel/descriptive. Doc design
doesn’t detract from readability
but may not appear polished.
Writing attempts principles of
technical prose (clear, concise),
though may be wordy or
redundant in places. Some
inappropriate word choices.
Paragraphs are complete, but
basic. Some grammatical errors
are likely present.
Most memo formatting
elements correct with only
minor errors. Headings are
logical & descriptive but not
parallel. Doc design is mostly
attractive and professional.
Writing effectively uses
principles of technical prose,
though may be wordy or
redundant at times. A few
awkward word choices or
disorganized paragraphs may
be present. Few grammatical
errors and they don’t impede
comprehension.
Proposal makes strategic use of
memo formatting strategy to
enhance persuasiveness.
Headings are descriptive, logical,
and parallel. Document design is
attractive and professional.
Clear, concise, accurate
presentation. Word choices and
writing style are appropriate.
Paragraphs are complete and
well-organized. Writing
masterfully deploys technical
prose for effective, efficient, and
nearly error-free presentation of
ideas.