Grading Scheme - Literature review presentation#
Due Thursday, Nov. 18, 2025 | Total 12 points (12% of Final Grade)
Project Presentation (10 minutes long, slide number varies)
Total: (12 points)
Prepare a 10 minute oral presentation using Keynote, Powerpoint, Google Slides, or similar presentation tool describing the astrophysical phenomena explored, its relevance to the topics in this class, and optionally any key results this topic has had recently.
The goal of these presentations are to describe the astrophysical phenomena to the layperson, connect it to the relevant topics explored in this class (e.g. like the topics explored in the lecture or sub-chapter titles), and also provide any interesting and recent progress in this area of astronomy.
Project Presentation Feedback to Peers
Total (8 points) (8% of Final Grade)
See details on the Guidelines for this feedback here.
Rolling Deadline Due Tue. EoD, Dec. 9, 2025.
Grading of the Presentation#
Scientific depth#
Exceptional (3-4) points: The (astro)physics is clearly explained in a concise but insightful way. The topic is appropriately unwrapped and connected to the broader context. Qualitative and quantitative aspects are clearly addressed and put in context.
Very Good (2-3) points: The (astro)physics is explained in a clear way and context is provided. Quantitative and qualitative aspects are discussed in an understandable fashion.
Adequate (1-2) points: The (astro)physics is explained but the presentation could be clearer. Small gaps in the quantitative and/or qualitative aspects can be identified.
Fair (0-1) points: The (astro)physics is not explained or the explanation is incorrect. Quantitative and/or qualitative errors are present,
Content logic and readability#
Exceptional (3-4) points: The scope of the topic is clearly stated. The slides builds up clearly and progressively, in an easy to follow and logical way. The physics presented is correct and the depth is adequate. References are to reliable sources.
Very Good (2-3) points: The scope is stated clearly stated. The presentation logically builds to it, and the reader can follow it. The (astro) physics is clearly explained and the is given sufficient pointers to dig deeper.
Adequate (1-2) points: The scope could have been clarified more explicitly but is in the end achieved. The (astro)physical aspects are explained in an appropriate way that the reader can follow. The reader is given a starting point for further investigation.
Fair (0-1) points: The presentation does not proceed orderly and it is hard to follow. The (astro)physical context is left implicit and not enough pointers for further investigation are provided. The text is hard to follow.
Structure and formatting#
Exceptional (3-4) points: Clear, logical, engaging, and easy to follow. All figures are useful, have captions, and are and well integrated with text. All references are provided and relevant.
Very Good (2-3) points: Figures are provided with useful caption and integrated in the text. All references are listed.
Adequate (1-2) points: The text is sufficiently clear. When present, figures are useful but could be better integrated, captions could be improved for clarity. References are provided but seem incomplete.
Fair (0-1) points: The text is hard to follow. Figures and/or captions are missing or not useful. References are incomplete or missing.
REMINDER: Despite this grading rubric being partially generated using chatGPT. The use of LLMs is prohibited in this class and in particular for this project report. Refer to the course syllabus for more details on this policy if necessary.