I deserve a 7-8 range from criterion A because I have provided lots of descriptions about my topic and I have developed my explanations, as well. I have defined most of my economic terms that I have used throughout my presentation. I could have developed my explanations more and went in depth with my work.
I think I will fit under the 7-8 range for criterion B. I was able to connect the economic concepts with my article about iPhones effectively and was able to show some depth in my explanations. I included the economic terms (like market size and substitution effect) in the right situations, as well.
My arguments and decisions were fully supported as I explained how I went through the process of PACED. The analysis was a good level and I have also effectively used my investigative skills. I have made a critical analysis but have not went in depth with the information between the analysis and the evidence.
I deserve a 6-7 range in the criterion D because I have communicated relevant information and have developed the information as well. My presentation was pretty clear and brought the audiences attention to the visuals presentation in the slides, that had supported my information. I had eye contact with the audience for most of the presentation and was able to speak out loud and clearly. There may have been occasional errors as I have presented my information.