5.0 %Evaluating and Documenting Sources (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, references page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style.) Contains no title slide, no references section, and no correctly cited references within the body of the presentation. Title slide is incomplete or inaccurate. References section includes sources, but many citation errors. Citations are included within the body of the presentation, but with many errors. Title slide has minor errors. References section includes sources, but they are not consistently cited correctly. Citations are included within the body of the presentation but with some errors. Title slide is complete. References section includes correctly cited sources with minimal errors. Correct citations are included within the body of the presentation. Title slide is complete. References section includes correctly cited sources. Correct citations are included within the body of the presentation.

10.0 %Language Use and Audience Awareness (Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of ?primer prose? indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately. Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately. Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part. The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly. The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

15.0 %Layout The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident. The layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text. The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability. The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.

30.0 %Presentation 15.0 %Speaker Notes The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor The speaker notes lack logical sequence of information. Description of ideas is unclear. The speaker notes are vague or insufficient to explain content. The speaker notes are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other. The speaker notes are written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information, exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. The speaker notes are written clearly and concise. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. Provides specific information necessary to assist the audience in understanding each slide?s importance.

50.0 %Overview of the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Plan (HACCP) Includes little or no information about HACCP. Subject knowledge is not evident. Analysis of the criteria is not outlined or outlined poorly. Includes little knowledge about HACCP with few supporting details and examples. Little subject knowledge is evident. Includes knowledge about the topics with supporting details and examples. Some knowledge of HACCP and its advantages is evident. Surface level of evaluation of the content is offered. Includes essential knowledge about the topics including history of HACCP, advantages of use, and description of critical control points and includes supporting details and examples. Subject knowledge appears to be good. Analysis is direct, competent, and appropriate of the criteria. Covers topic in-depth with extensive details and examples. Subject knowledge is excellent.