Thinks well on feet. Thorough understanding of issues and very persuasive on all the main points. Exhibits mastery of case and materials. Clearly outlines team's case or position. Closing incorporated examples from actual trial. Demonstrated elements of spontaneity, not entirely based on prepared text (especially relevant to the closing). Does not rely on notes.

Fluent, persuasive, clear and understandable. Confident delivery. Very good organization of material and thought. Makes the most of the main points for the team's case. Successful in attaining objectives. Limited reliance on notes.

Communication is clear and understandable, but could be stronger in fluency and persuasiveness. Makes some of the main points for the team's case. Partially successful in attaining objectives. Relies on notes extensively.

Disorganized presentation. Inadequate preparation. Communication lacks clarity or is ineffective. Lacks depth in terms of knowledge of task and materials. Reads directly from notes.

Very effective in asking straight-forward questions and eliciting information. Ability to think fast on his/her feet. Can sort out essential from nonessential and use time effectively to accomplish major objectives. Clear understanding of fact issues and law. Superior qualities of fluency and clarity. Excellent in response to objections. Excellent in use of objections in cross-examination. Observed rules of competition at all times.

Questions are properly phrased. Effective in asking straight-forward questions and eliciting information for team's side. Correct responses to objections. Good use of objections during cross-examination. Throughout questioning attorney made appropriate use of time. Poised, articulate and confident delivery.

Generally proper phrasing of questions. Fairly effective in asking straight-forward questions and eliciting information for team's side. Generally appropriate response to objections. Adequate use of objections on cross. Observes proper courtroom decorum. Good interaction with witnesses.

Some leading questions; some narrative questions. Ineffective in asking straight-forward questions. Does not bring out key information for team's side of case. Lack of adequate preparation. Fails to observe proper courtroom decorum. Lack of poise, poor interaction with witnesses. Improper phrasing and rephrasing of questions. Lack of adequate knowledge of mock trial rules of evidence and the case.

Creative; organized and convincing presentation. Demonstrates skill in utilizing leading questions. Proper rephrasing of questions. Very effective use of objections to direct examination. Very effectively exposed contradictions in testimony and weakened other side's case. Able to think fast on his/her feet. Deals confidently and appropriately with difficult witness(es). Ability to proceed without reading from prepared script.

Demonstrates skills in utilizing leading questions in most instances. Good rephrasing of questions. Effective objections to direct examination. Demonstrated good understanding of trial procedures, rules of evidence, and issues. Shows poise, good preparation; articulate and confident delivery. Exposed contradictions in testimony and weakened other side's case.

Some skill in utilizing leading questions. Generally proper rephrasing of questions. Some proper objections to direct examination; some missed objections. Can perform outside of script, but with less confidence than when using script. Grasps major aspects of case but does not convey mastery.

Improperly phrased or ineffective questioning. Inability to effectively rephrase questions. Inappropriate or ineffective objections to direct examination of witnesses s/he crossed. Illogical,unsure of self. Performance lacks depth in terms of knowledge of task and materials. Difficulty in performing outside of script.

Direct

Knowledgeable about case facts and theory of team's case. Very effective in responding to questions. Poised and confident. Very articulate and persuasive in role. Excellent characterization and convincing testimony. Demonstrates mastery of mock trial rules.

Cross

Excellent responses to questions. Skillful in thinking fast on his/her feet. Able to field questions with confidence and poise. Highly credible in role.

Direct

Responses show good preparation. Good characterization; realistic; stays in role. Convincing and persuasive testimony. Demonstrates understanding of trial rules.

Cross

Able to respond will to questions posed. Maintains credibility for the most part.

Direct

Responses showed only adequate preparation. Characterization adequate, but not always believable. Good but uninspiring performance.

Cross

Maintains confidence and poise, but has difficulty fielding questions effectively and in maintaining credibility.

Direct

Responses are not thorough. Does not get into role effectively. Characterization not believable. Inadequate preparation. Fails to abide by mock trial rules.

Cross

Unable to field questions with confidence and poise. Lacks ability to think fast on his/her feet. Lacks credibility. Deliberately evasive and non-responsive.