Home || Introduction || Task || Process || Resources || Evaluation || Conclusion || Teacher Page
Evaluation Page |
Scoring Rubric - 20 points possible |
Teacher instruction - The first four criteria (16 points) on the Rubric are used to judge the entire group, the remaining (4) points will come from the individual work for each student. |
Student Name________________ |
Date________________________ |
Assessment Page |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
Score |
Sources |
Incorporated
a variety of credible sources beyond those provided by the instructor. |
Utilized
sources provided by the instructor, but did no further research. |
Used only a
few of the sources
provided by the instructor or used sources of questionable credibility.
|
Few or no sources listed. |
|
Presentation |
Presentation is clear, well prepared, and effectively explains group processes and outcome. |
Presentation is reasonably
clear, explains group processes and outcome, but fails to layout the
clear pathway.
|
Presentation does not
clearly link steps in process, but explains general ideas of the process. |
Confusing, unorganized,
and incomplete.
|
|
Group Dynamics |
Group
gathers and shares information completely, divides duties equally, shows
great teamwork skills. |
Group
shares some information, divides duties almost equally, does not fully
work together as a team.
|
Group shows unequal
labor distribution, some disagreements, does not fully work together
as a team. |
Group does not work
well together, has constant unresolved arguments. |
|
Documentation |
Accurate and informative
notes, easily comprehended, all steps in process documented thoroughly
and accurately. |
Informative
notes, mostly comprehensible, documented completely.
|
Maintained
mostly incomprehensible notes, documentation incomplete.
|
Few or no notes, no process documentation. |
|
Individual Scores-Only score one part
below for the student |
|||||
Water Chemist |
Identified all 5 parameters,
thorough research, worked well with waste remediation specialist, determined
optimum range for selected fish.
|
Identified most of
the parameters, communicated some with waste remediation specialist,
determined a range for selected fish.
|
Identified a few of the parameters,
talked to waste remediation specialist a couple of times, incorrect range
for selected fish. |
Identified two or less of the parameters,
no contact with waste remediation specialist, no range specified for selected
fish. |
|
Nutritionist |
Lots of research on
what fish eat, identified 3 components of fish feed, develop optimum
practical diet for selected fish.
|
Researched what fish eat, 3 components
of fish feed, developed diet for selected fish. |
Little research on what fish eat,
2 or less components of fish feed, poor diet designed for selected fish. |
No research done, 1 or less components
of fish feed, no diet designed for selected fish. |
|
Waste
Remediation Specialist |
Identified types and sources of waste, very
detailed
chart of ammonia/nitrate cycle, worked well with water chemist to select optimum filter equipment. |
Identified types and
sources |
Identified sources of waste, incomplete ammonia/nitrate cycle chart, selected filter equipment without water chemist consultation. |
No waste sources identified,
incorrect chart of ammonia/nitrate cycle, improper or no selection of filter equipment. |
Total _______ | |
17-20 points | A |
14-17 points | B |
11-14 points | C |
8-11 points | D |
< 8 points | F |
Grade ______ |
Home
|| Introduction ||
Task || Process ||
Resources || Evaluation
|| Conclusion || Teacher
Page