Performance Based Assessment: DEBATE: Gun rights vs.

Gun control--To what extent does the government control us? What side is more valid? What side should we agree with? Advocates of gun control: support stricter firearm laws: tougher background checks and longer waiting periods for those purchasing guns; mandatory child safety locks; a limit of one handgun purchase per month; and raising the legal age limit for ownership of guns to age 21 from the current age of 18. They believe these measures will curb the rise of gun-related violence. Advocates of gun rights: say such legislation would infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. The National Rifle Association, a prominent voice in the gun debate, says firearm-control measures are unnecessary if lawmakers would enforce current laws. Category Respect for other team 5
All statements, body language, and responses were respectful and were in appropriate language. All information presented in this debate was clear, accurate and thorough. All counter-arguments were accurate, relevant and strong.

4
Statements and responses were respectful and used appropriate language, but once or twice body language was not. Most information presented in this debate was clear, accurate and thorough. Most counterarguments were accurate, relevant, and strong.

3
Most statements and responses were respectful and in appropriate language, but there was one sarcastic remark. Most information presented in the debate was clear and accurate, but was not usually thorough. Most counterarguments were accurate and relevant, but several were weak.

2
Statements, responses and/or body language were borderline appropriate. Some sarcastic remarks. Some information was accurate, but there were some minor inaccuracies. Some counter arguments were weak and irrelevant.

1
Statements, responses and/or body language were consistently not respectful.

Totals

Information

Information had some major inaccuracies OR was usually not clear.

Rebuttal

Counter-arguments were not accurate and/or relevant.

Use of facts/statistics

Every major point was well supported with several relevant facts, statistics and/or examples. All arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. The team clearly understood the topic in- depth and presented their information forcefully and convincingly. The team clearly prepared and used the research time professionally in order to use material during debate.

Every major point was adequately supported with relevant facts, statistics and/or examples. Most arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. The team clearly understood the topic in- depth and presented their information with ease. The team used the research time productively.

Organization

Understanding of Topic

Every major point was supported with facts, statistics and/or examples, but the relevance of some was questionable. All arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) but the organization was sometimes not clear or logical. The team seemed to understand the main points of the topic and presented those with ease. The team somewhat used their time for research and could have used more materials during debate

Some points were supported well, others were not.

Every point was not supported.

Arguments were not tied well to an idea.

Arguments were not tied to an idea at all.

The team seemed to understand the main points of the topic, but didnt present with ease The team acted out during research and was unable to effectively use their material for debate

The team did not show an adequate understanding of the topic. The team did not use their time for research and they were unable to use much during debate for support.

Misc: Preparation/using research material