DLF Forum and Learn@DLF
Conference Session Evaluation Rubric 2023
Adapted from the National Recreation and Park Association Conference Session Evaluation Rubric
Originality – 20%
The Planning Committee strives to continually present unique and exciting programs that reflect our dynamic community in an accessible way that engages participants and facilitates learning.
- 5: Excellent – The session proposal contains highly original approaches to or new perspectives toward programming and/or topics that reflect the DLF community. Session format is informative and includes multiple ways for participants to engage.
- 4: Good – The session proposal contains some original approach and perspectives reflecting the DLF community while addressing content that has been covered in other ways in the past. The session has multiple elements of engagement.
- 3: Competent – The session proposal addresses content that is expected and needed at the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF in a manner that is fitting and expected for that content within DLF standards and has at least one element of engagement.
- 2: Needs Improvement – The session proposal may be appropriate for the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF, but with some alteration to provide a unique and original stance with no elements of engagement. (i.e., The same session was delivered elsewhere but may be good if a different approach is taken)
- 1: Not Original – The session proposal demonstrates content that has been covered at length, has been presented on before by the listed speakers, or does not meet the suggested standards of a DLF Forum / Learn@DLF session.
Relevance – 20%
DLF seeks sessions that are of great interest to prospective attendees and clearly benefit the professional needs of the DLF community. The topic is important to the field and the communities we serve and is timely.
- 5: Excellent – This session proposal represents forward-looking content that reflects emerging trends and current needs of the profession, the communities we serve, and is timely.
- 4: Good – The session proposal demonstrates content that is timely and relevant to the profession and the communities we serve and includes either an emerging trend OR current need.
- 3: Competent – The session proposal demonstrates content that is relevant to the audience but may perpetuate a topic area that has plenty of coverage.
- 2: Needs Improvement – The session topic may meet the audience, theme, and context of the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF with some adjustment.
- 1: Not Relevant – The session proposal is not relevant to the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF audience.
Diversity & Inclusion – 20%
The sharing of different perspectives and experiences, and ways to address and include them, are essential in creating equitable programs and developing policies and organizational practices. Sessions should address or be inclusive of multiple perspectives and how difference in needs can and should be addressed.
- 5: Excellent – The proposal contains multiple diverse perspectives and experiences, and includes highly original approaches to address the difference of needs within the profession and provides examples of practical application.
- 4: Good – The session proposal demonstrates a few diverse perspectives and experiences, and includes somewhat original approaches to address the difference of needs within the profession.
- 3: Competent – The proposal contains at least one diverse perspective or experience, and includes approaches to address the difference of needs within the profession.
- 2: Needs Improvement – The proposal is a weak demonstration of different perspectives or approaches based on diverse experiences.
- 1: Does Not Meet Standard – The proposal does not include different perspectives or approaches based on diverse experiences.
Overall Quality – 20%
DLF is dedicated to ensuring that the programs at the DLF Forum and Learn@DLF meet the highest standards of excellence with sessions that are comprehensive where topic, intent, and learning outcomes are focused, well-presented, and thoughtfully articulated.
- 5: Excellent – Strongly recommend this session. The quality of the proposal exceeds the highest standards of excellence for content delivery within the context of the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF.
- 4: Good – This proposal delivers a standard format and quality that has become expected of DLF Forum / Learn@DLF sessions.
- 3: Competent – The proposal is competent but may require some minor changes to be considered for the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF (i.e., Shorten title, session length, adjust methodology/learning outcomes).
- 2: Needs Improvement – This proposal requires adjustments if it is to be considered for the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF (i.e., Change or adjustment in speakers, topic approach, methodology).
- 1: Does Not Meet Standard – This proposal does not meet minimum standards for delivery at the DLF Forum / Learn@DLF.
Reviewer’s Recommendation – 20%
The reviewer’s recommendation for the inclusion of the proposal in the conference program.
- 5: Definitely accept – very high quality
- 4: Probably accept – good quality
- 3: Neutral – borderline
- 2: Probably reject – poor quality
- 1: Definitely reject – of little merit or inappropriate for this conference