RUB
Assessment Rubric
Elevator Pitch Assessment Rubric
| Criteria | Weight | 1-Poor | 2-Weak | 3-Good | 4-Excellent |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Clarity – Problem / Opportunity clearly explained |
15% |
Confusing or unclear |
Weak explanation |
Mostly clear |
Very clear and compelling |
|
Innovation – Originality & creativity of idea |
20% |
Not original |
Low originality |
Creative |
Highly innovative & original |
|
Feasibility – Practicality of implementation |
20% |
Not feasible |
Very difficult |
Feasible with some support |
Clearly feasible and realistic |
|
Impact / Value – Benefits & significance |
20% |
No clear impact |
Minimal impact |
Good impact |
High impact & significant value |
|
Relevance – Alignment with RUB context, priorities and needs |
15% |
Not aligned with RUB context |
Limited alignment |
Generally aligned |
Strongly aligned and highly relevant |
|
Delivery – Overall presentation structure, quality and pitching skills |
10% |
Poorly presented |
Weak delivery |
Good delivery |
Excellent, confident, and engaging |
Guidelines for Using the Assessment Rubric & Selecting the Top Four Groups
1 Instructions for Judges
2 Scoring Method
3 Ranking and Selection
3.1 Example
| Group | Clarity (15%) | Innovation (20%) | Feasibility (20%) | Impact (20%) | Relevance (15%) | Delivery (10%) | Total Score | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 100 | 1 |
| Group 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 2 |
| ... | 15 | 3 | ||||||
| Group 20 | 0 | 20 |