---
# System prepended metadata

title: Podcast Evaluation Rubric

---

# Podcast Evaluation Rubric

## 1. Intentionality

**Description**:  
Evaluates the degree of intentional decision-making in the recording, editing, and assembly processes.

Everything makes meaning and either works for or against your argument. Intentionality underscores that your decisions and details truly matter in the technical production of your multimedia project. 

Something about mix, hierarchy of sound



**Scoring**:

| Score | Description |
|-------|-------------|
| 5     | All elements are purposefully used and enhance the project's effectiveness; editing is seamless and demonstrates high creativity and precision. |
| 4     | Most elements are intentionally used with minor exceptions; editing enhances the project's clarity and impact. |
| 3     | Elements generally appear intentional, but some lack clear purpose or slightly detract from the overall narrative. |
| 2     | Intentionality is sporadic across elements; several aspects do not contribute effectively to the project's goals. |
| 1     | Many elements seem random or unintentionally included, causing significant distractions from the project's purpose. |

## 2. Use of Voice (Narration)

**Description**:  
Evaluates the effectiveness of the narrator's voice in conveying information, setting the tone, and engaging the listener.

The voice of a podcast narrator posesses a distinctive and unmistakable timbre,but why is that? Think of your favorite podcast host. What sort of words might you use to describe the *quality* of their voice? Warm? Clear? Dark? These words are all the result of a few technical descisions that grant a measure of *ethos* in your podcast argument (for better or worse)

**Scoring**:

| Score | Description |
|-------|-------------|
| 5     | The narration is exceptionally clear, engaging, and effectively connects all segments of the podcast. |
| 4     | The narration is clear and generally engaging with minor lapses in connection or emotional alignment. |
| 3     | Narration is adequate, with noticeable areas for improvement in clarity or emotional engagement. |
| 2     | The narration is somewhat unclear or inconsistently engaging, with frequent disconnects. |
| 1     | The narration fails to engage or clearly convey content, with significant disconnection. |

## 3. Use of Music

**Description**:  
Assesses the role of music in enhancing the podcast’s atmosphere, supporting the narrative, and maintaining listener engagement.

Music is never simply "background" in your podcast. It constantly communicates with and even interrogates your other audio. Think carefully about what your choice in music in commmunicating in dialogue with your narration. What might your music be saying?

**Scoring**:

| Score | Description |
|-------|-------------|
| 5     | Music perfectly enhances the podcast’s theme, mood, and narrative flow with seamless transitions. |
| 4     | Music is well-chosen and generally supports the podcast's themes with minor issues in transition. |
| 3     | Music is appropriate but does not fully enhance the narrative or mood. |
| 2     | Music is occasionally misaligned with the podcast’s tone or is jarringly transitioned. |
| 1     | Music choices are inappropriate or distract significantly from the podcast's content. |

## 4. Integration of other Sounds (workshop name)

**Description**:  
Evaluates the integration and impact of interviews, sound effects, and other recorded sounds.

This is the category that encompasses every other (intentional) sound in your podcast. We find that often these sounds function much like "primary sources" in your podcast. They are the result of field work or of archival research. THink about how these sources interact with your voice and music. What timbrally sets these sounds apart from your others?



**Scoring**:

| Score | Description |
|-------|-------------|
| 5     | Recorded sounds are highly relevant, clear, and integrated flawlessly with other elements to enhance the narrative. |
| 4     | Sounds are relevant and clear with slight issues in integration. |
| 3     | Sounds support the narrative but are not integrated smoothly or lack clarity. |
| 2     | Some recorded sounds seem out of place or disrupt the flow. |
| 1     | Recorded sounds are irrelevant or distract significantly from the narrative. |

## 5. Rhetorical Effectiveness

**Description**:  
Assesses how effectively the podcast employs rhetorical strategies to engage and persuade the audience.

MORE DESCRIPTION. Has clear structure, Pieces all work together. THis is the total structure where they are all in conversation

**Scoring**:

| Score | Description |
|-------|-------------|
| 5     | Uses rhetorical strategies expertly to engage and persuade, with a compelling and clear argument structure. |
| 4     | Effectively uses rhetorical strategies with minor lapses in argument clarity or engagement. |
| 3     | Adequate use of rhetoric, but not particularly compelling or persuasive. |
| 2     | Rhetorical strategies are poorly executed; argument is weak or unclear. |
| 1     | Fails to use rhetorical strategies effectively; argument is disjointed or unpersuasive. |

## 6. Overall Production Quality

**Description**:  
Evaluates the technical quality and professional finish of the podcast.

**Scoring**:

| Score | Description |
|-------|-------------|
| 5     | Exceptional sound quality and editing with perfect balance and no distractions. |
| 4     | High sound quality with minor issues in balance or occasional distractions. |
| 3     | Adequate production quality but noticeable issues in sound balance or editing. |
| 2     | Several technical issues detract from listening experience. |
| 1     | Poor sound quality and editing that significantly hinder the listening experience. |


![alt text](https://files.slack.com/files-pri/T0HTW3H0V-F070QBDQBBN/website.png?pub_secret=dd8ae74ba1)

![alt text](https://files.slack.com/files-pri/T0HTW3H0V-F070F8GHCPQ/visual_studio_code.png?pub_secret=0e75f3b2b9)