[ad_1]
Rubric Criteria
Summary of the Project
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Summary of project and why it was needed
- Target
5.5 points
Summary is comprehensive, including drawing complex connections as to why the project was needed.
- Acceptable
5.06 points
Summary is detailed. Summary provides relevant examples of why the project was needed.
- Approaching
4.84 points
Summary is cursory. Summary vaguely includes why the project was needed.
- Insufficient
4.4 points
Summary is flawed. Summary inaccurately includes why the project was needed.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Summary is incomplete. Summary fails to include why the project was needed.
Evaluation Strategies
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation strategies
- Target
5.5 points
Evaluation strategies used in project demonstrates best practices.
- Acceptable
5.06 points
Evaluation strategies are beyond surface level.
- Approaching
4.84 points
Evaluation strategies are surface level.
- Insufficient
4.4 points
Evaluation strategies are inaccurate.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Evaluation strategies are not included.
Measure Project Effectiveness
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Measure of project effectiveness
- Target
5.5 points
Description provides new insight of how the project’s effectiveness will be measured.
- Acceptable
5.06 points
Description clearly explains the reasoning of how the project’s effectiveness will be measured. effectiveness will be measured.
- Approaching
4.84 points
Description of how the project’s effectiveness will be measured lacks detail.
- Insufficient
4.4 points
Description inaccurately includes how the project’s effectiveness will be measured.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Description does not include how the project’s effectiveness will be measured.
Evaluation Intervals
2.75 points
Criteria Description
Evaluation intervals
- Target
2.75 points
Discussion of evaluation intervals is insightful.
- Acceptable
2.53 points
Discussion of evaluation intervals is clear.
- Approaching
2.42 points
Discussion of evaluation intervals lacks details.
- Insufficient
2.2 points
Discussion of evaluation intervals is unreasonable.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion of evaluation intervals is not included.
Measure and Monitor Safety Initiatives
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Measure and monitor safety initiatives and how adjustments will be communicated
- Target
5.5 points
Discussion of how safety initiatives will be monitored and modified is extensive. Discussion of how adjustments will be communicated is sophisticated.
- Acceptable
5.06 points
Discussion clearly explains the reasoning of how safety initiatives will be monitored and modified. Discussion includes how adjustments will be communicated.
- Approaching
4.84 points
Discussion of how safety initiatives will be monitored and modified is partially proficient. Discussion somewhat includes how adjustments will be communicated.
- Insufficient
4.4 points
Discussion unconvincingly includes how safety initiatives will be monitored and modified. Discussion fails to include how adjustments will be communicated.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Discussion does not include how safety initiatives will be monitored and modified. Discussion fails to include how adjustments will be communicated.
Project Next Steps
2.75 points
Criteria Description
Project next steps
- Target
2.75 points
Next steps for the project are comprehensive.
- Acceptable
2.53 points
Next steps for the project are accurate.
- Approaching
2.42 points
Next steps for the project are inconsistent.
- Insufficient
2.2 points
Next steps for the project are incomplete.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Next steps for the project are not included.
Presentation of Screencast
11 points
Criteria Description
Presentation of screencast
- Target
11 points
The screencast includes an appropriate introduction and purpose statement along with seamless transitions between prompts. Audio is clear and free of all distractions.
- Acceptable
10.12 points
The screencast includes an adequate introduction and purpose statement along with smooth transitions between prompts. Audio is consistent and relatively free of distraction or sound loss.
- Approaching
9.68 points
The screencast includes an introduction or purpose statement that could be more adequately presented; or the transitions between prompts could be smoother. Audio is inconsistent.
- Insufficient
8.8 points
The screencast includes an introduction or purpose statement that is not adequately presented; or the transitions between prompts are abrupt or disjointed. Audio is muddled.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
The screencast does not include an introduction or purpose statement. The transitions between prompts are abrupt or disjointed. Audio is inaudible.
Layout
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Layout
- Target
5.5 points
Layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text.
- Acceptable
5.06 points
Layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text.
- Approaching
4.84 points
Layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts from or does not enhance readability.
- Insufficient
4.4 points
Layout shows some structure, but appears cluttered and busy or distracting, with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read, with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident.
Language Use and Audience Awareness
5.5 points
Criteria Description
Includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.
- Target
5.5 points
The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.
- Acceptable
5.06 points
The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly.
- Approaching
4.84 points
Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part.
- Insufficient
4.4 points
Some distracting inconsistencies in language or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately.
Mechanics of Writing
2.75 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use.
- Target
2.75 points
The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
- Acceptable
2.53 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
- Approaching
2.42 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
- Insufficient
2.2 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct, but not varied.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed.
Documentation of Sources
2.75 points
Criteria Description
Includes citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style.
- Target
2.75 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of errors.
- Acceptable
2.53 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
- Approaching
2.42 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
- Insufficient
2.2 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
- Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
[ad_2]
Testimonials
