Project Citizen Hearing
Evaluation Rating Sheet
A Project Citizen hearing provides an opportunity for the student to share in a public forum what they have learned about a community problem and how they are proposing to solve it through the public policymaking process. The presentation will be made by four different groups of students each presenting a different aspect of the entire groups research and their recommendation for a public policy. When evaluating each group, consider the Criteria for Evaluation below for that group of students and then use the following rating scale. Give only one whole numeric rating (1–10) for each of the five sections of the Criteria for Evaluation.
Excellent: 9-10 AboveAverage: 7-8 Average: 5-6 Below Average: 3-4 Insufficient: 1-2
Criteria for Evaluation
Rating
Comments
Hearing Group 1: Understanding of the Problem
· Stated and explained the problem and its causes and presented evidence that there is a problem
· Demonstrated an understanding of issue(s) involved in the problem
· Demonstrated an understanding of existing or proposed public policies
· Explained disagreements about the problem that may exist in the community
· Explained why government should be involved in the solution
Hearing Group 2: Analysis of Alternative Policies
· Presented two or three alternative policies to address the problem
· Explained advantages and disadvantages of each alternative policy presented
· Identified controversies and conflicts that need to be addressed for each alternative
Hearing Group 3: Public Policy Development and Persuasiveness
· Stated a public policy that addresses the problem and identified the government branch or agency responsible for enacting their proposed public policy
· Supported their proposed public policy with reasoning and evidence
· Identified advantages and disadvantages of their proposed public policy
· Explained and supported why their proposed public policy is constitutional
Hearing Group 4: Implementation of an Action Plan
· Identified individuals and groups, both supporters and opponents, who will need to be influenced
· Identified government officials, both supporters and opponents, who will need to be influenced
· Outlined and explained an action process for getting their proposed public policy enacted
· Proposed actions that build and expand on presentations by previous groups
Overall Hearing: Extent to which the entire presentation
· Constructed a clear and convincing sequence from one group to the next
· Used and documented research from multiple sources and made reference to sources and research evidence they used
· Referenced relevant and appropriate graphics and written information
· Used standards of good oral presentation (pace, projection, articulation, poise, eye contact)
· Shared speaking responsibility while making the presentation
· Included evidence of reflection that states what the students learned
TOTAL POINTS AWARDED
Evaluator: _____________________________________________________
Date: _________________________________
公民教育实践活动听证会评价评分表
公民教育实践活动成听证会向学生提供在公共论坛上对他们所了解的社区问题及其如何使用公共政策制定过程的方法解决这个问题的机会。听证会上四个小组将进行演示，每一个小组代表班级对他们调研成果和所推荐的一项公共政策的某一个方面进行陈述。当对每一个小组进行评价时，考虑采用下列的标准对该组的学生进行评价，然后使用以下的评分表进行评分。在五个部分评价标准的每一栏中给出一个整数分值（1–10）。
优： 9-10 中上： 7- 8 中：5- 6 中下：3- 4 差：1- 2
评价标准
评分
意见
听证会第一组：对问题的理解
· 陈述和解释问题及其产生原因并且提出问题存在的证据；
· 论证对问题涉及事项的理解；
· 论证对存在的或者提议的公共政策的理解；
· 对社区中可能存在的针对问题的不同意见进行说明；
· 解释为什么政府应该参与问题的解决。
听证会第二组： 对可选择政策的分析
· 提出二项或者三项解决问题的可选择公共政策；
· 解释所提出的每一项可选择政策的优点和缺点；
· 识别每一项可选择政策可能需要解决的分歧和冲突。
听证会第三组：公共政策开发和说服力
· 陈述解决问题的公共政策并且识别负责制定提议公共政策的政府机构或者政府部门；
· 用理由和证据对提议公共政策进行支持；
· 识别和解释他们提议公共政策的优点和缺点；
· 解释并提供支持性材料说明为什么提议的公共政策是符合宪法的。
听证会第四组：行动计划的实施
· 识别支持和反对的个人和群体， 需要对谁施加影响力；
· 识别政府官员中的支持者和反对者， 需要对谁施加影响力。
· 概述和解释为了使他们提议的公共政策被采纳的行动计划；
· 在前面小组作品并对其进行补充扩展的基础之上策划行动。
整个听证会：整个演示过程的完美程度
· 构思了从一个小组到下一个小组合理和清晰的次序；
· 便用的资料来自多个出处， 资料来源和所采用的调研证据提供了适宜的注释；
· 采用了有关和适宜的图表和文字资料；
· 使用了良好的口头演示标准（语速、语调、表达、体态和目光接触）；
· 在演示过程中合理地分配演说职责；
· 包含了学生们对学到经验进行反思的证据。
总评分
评价者： _____________________________________________________
日期： _________________________________
关闭窗口
打印文档