Question: Assessment Key for Sections 1 through 4:
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
Unacceptable
Several pieces of key information were missing and many of the explanationswere poor/unclear
|
Needs Work
One or two pieces of key information were omitted and/or some of the explanation was unclear
|
Good
All of the information was included and explained clearly with a minor omission
|
Superior
All information was included, was very clearly explained (and presentation was enhanced in some way)
|
Section 1. Introduction. This should include:
Presenters' names
The title and author(s) of the article
A clear statement of the purpose of the studyand statement of the authors' hypothesis or hypotheses
A brief review of previous research setting the stage for the present investigation
Definition of vocabulary that will be important for your audience in understanding the article
Overall quality of this section of presentation:
1. Unacceptable
2. Acceptable
3. Good
4. Superior
Section 2. The research design and data collected. This section should include:
A description of the participants
A description of the tasks that participants were given (and why they were given them)
A description of the order of tasks and how they were administered
An explanation of the data that were collected
An explanation of why the study was designed this way (how it enables the researchers to test their hypothesis/hypotheses)
Overall quality of this section of presentation:
1. Unacceptable
2. Acceptable
3. Good
4. Superior
Section 3. Results. This section should include:
Presentation and explanation of the data
Graphs/tables/figures to aid in the explanation (make sure you EXPLAIN what these show)
Whether the hypothesis was supported and what that means
Overall quality of this section of presentation:
1. Unacceptable
2. Acceptable
3. Good
4. Superior
Section 4. Conclusions/Discussionrelated to the article. This section should include:
What the results of the studies tell us about this topic/area of cognitive psychology (and how these findings are/can be applied to the "real world")
Critiques of the research (what could have/should have been done better/differently)
Suggestions for future research
Questions for your audience (optional)
Overall quality of this section of presentation:
1. Unacceptable
2. Acceptable
3. Good
4. Superior
Section 5. General Presentation Skills. Were the presenters:
Was the presenter organized, clear, engaged with audience, able to maintain audience interest, able to use technology/visual aids/activities effectively, and did they speak clearly and maintain eye contact?
Overall quality of this section of presentation:
1. Unacceptable
2. Acceptable
3. Good
4. Superior
Article: Does the autistic child have a "theory of mind"?* (By SIMON BARON-COHEN, ALAN M. LESLIE, UTA FRITH)