SRM UNIVERSITYFACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERINGDEPARTMENT OF ECE

SESSION PLAN

Course Code : EC0425Course Title : SeminarYear& Semester : IV Yr / VII semesterCourse Time : Odd semester (Jul – Dec 2012)Location : Tech Park

Faculty Details:

Name of the staff Sec. Office Office Hours Mail ID

Mr.S.Nivash A TP1206ADay 5, 6th hr

nivash.s@ktr.srmuniv.ac.in& 7th hr

Mrs.P.Malarvizhi B TP1203ADay 3, 6th hr

malarvizhi.p@ktr.srmuniv.ac.inDay 5, 6th hr

Mr.M.Aravindan C TP12s4Day 1, 6th hr

aravindan.m@ktr.srmuniv.ac.inDay 3, 6th hr

Mr.K.Ramesh D TP1006ADay 3, 6th hr

ramesh.kr@ktr.srmuniv.ac.inDay 4 6th hr

Mrs.K.Suganthi E TP903ADay 1, 6th hr

suganthi.k@ktr.srmuniv.ac.inDay 3, 6th hr

Mrs.S.Umadevi F TP12034Day 4, 6th hr

umadevi.s@ktr.srmuniv.ac.inDay 5, 6th hr

Session Plan:

Duration for each student : 10 -15 minsMax. Marks : 100

Evaluation Scheme:

Attendance : 5 marksTeacher Evaluation : 50 marksPPT : 20 marksSeminar Report (in IEEE format) : 25 marksTotal Marks : 100 marks

SEMINAR EVALUATION FORM

Reviewer Name: _______________________________ Date: _________________

Title of the Seminar: __________________________________________________

Presenter Name and Register no:

______________________________________________________

01. Comprehensible Argument and Organization

Poor Avg. Great

1 2 3 4 5 Introduced motivation and interest in the topic

1 2 3 4 5 Gave overview of presentation

1 2 3 4 5 Identified key points early in talk

1 2 3 4 5 Organized material in logical, coherent way

1 2 3 4 5 Supported discussion of key points with sufficient detail

1 2 3 4 5 Presented significant results

1 2 3 4 5 Planned concluding remarks (not just “I guess that’s it.”)

Argument Score: ______/ 35

02. Accessible Delivery

Poor Avg. Great

1 2 3 4 5 Avoided fillers such as “uhm,” “like,” and “you know"

1 2 3 4 5 Pronounced words clearly and audibly

1 2 3 4 5 Spoke without noticeable pauses in mid-sentence

1 2 3 4 5 Varied rate of delivery (slowed for key points; on details)

1 2 3 4 5 Changed pitch for emphasis (high/low contrasts in tone)

1 2 3 4 5 Looked at entire audience

1 2 3 4 5Spoke key points, intro, and concluding remarks withoutreading

1 2 3 4 5 Used concept-related gestures to show relationships

1 2 3 4 5 Avoided nervous hand movements

1 2 3 4 5 Confident stance

1 2 3 4 5 Appeared enthusiastic

Delivery Score: _______/ 55

03. Accessible Visuals in Support of Argument

Poor Avg. Great

1 2 3 4 5Appropriate number of words and items on slides/blackboard (notoverloaded)

1 2 3 4 5Used font sizes/images that could be seen easily/Used theblackboard and chalk efficiently.

1 2 3 4 5 Diagrams focused on critical elements, not excessive in detail

1 2 3 4 5Background did not interfere with diagrams or text/Drawn thepictures clearly .

1 2 3 4 5Sufficient “white” space to make organization of informationclear/ written text legibly on board

1 2 3 4 5 Colors were easy to view/Visibility of contents on the board

Visuals Score: _______/ 30

04. Q & A

Poor Avg. Great

1 2 3 4 5 Listened to questions without interrupting

1 2 3 4 5 Repeated or rephrased questions

1 2 3 4 5 Began with general answer and then followed up with details

1 2 3 4 5 Addressed responses to everyone

1 2 3 4 5 Turned answer toward positive aspects, when possible

1 2 3 4 5Avoided cover-up gestures (fig leaf, behind back, armscrossed)

Q & A Score: _______/ 30

Grand Total: ________/ 150

Additional comments

Strengths

Weaknesses