Portfolio Rubrics- Spring 2006

Analytical Rubric for Burning Questions- Total 25 points

Depth of Burning Question Answer

7 Rating:
In depth understanding is evident. Approaches all aspects and explains in detail at the college level.Presents precise and meticulous scientific understanding integrating information from multiple resources.

6-5 Rating:
Has a basic understanding and explains well, but the depth of the explanation is lacking. Some aspects not explained correctly.

2-4Rating:
Basic understanding, but at a low level- many aspects not mentioned or explained correctly.

0-1 Rating:
Simple explanations that are not at college level. Many explanations are so simple that they may be construed as incorrect or it is evident that misconceptions exist..

Sources for your answer to the burning question

3 Rating:
All sources are cited correctly. Sources are credible and appropriate. At least 3 different sources.

2 Rating:
All sources are credible and most are cited correctly.

 

0-1 Rating:
Many sources less than credible (suspect) and/or are not cited correctly.

Annotation of Teacher Resources

5 Rating:
Appropriate resources identified and annotated for the teacher's use in the classroom. The annotation gives a good summary of the resources content.

4 Rating:
Appropriate resources identified- but annotation is not sufficient to know how the teacher could use the resource or what is contained in the resource.

3 Rating:
Resources identified but may not be appropriate for the content or may not be helpful for teachers. Minimal annotation.

2-0 Rating:
No annotation or no resources identified.

Number of Burning Question Postings

5 Rating:
Interacted on a weekly basis on the bulletin board. Posted and responded to others in order to develop conversation about scientific concepts..

4 Rating:
Interacted on a weekly basis- Posted a question weekly. Responded to others in a limited fashion.

3-2 Rating:
Interacted on the bulletin board by only posting a question. Did not respond to others.

1-0 Rating:
Minimal, erratic, or absent in burning question posting on the bulletin board.

Level of Burning Question Postings

5 Rating:
Thorough open-ended and diverse. Much thought was evident, cognitive level elevated (levels 2-5 Blooms)

4-3 Rating:
Many questions in the same topic or cognitive level range (1-5 Blooms)

2-1 Rating:
Low level of questions (Level 1 Blooms)

0 Rating:
insufficient number to judge

Analytical Rubric for Children's Book- Total 25 points

5 Rating:
Science concepts are correctly discussed or illustrated.

 4 Rating:
Science concepts are mainly correct with only minor misconceptions.		 2-3 Rating:
Science concepts contain one or more major misconceptions.		 0-1 Rating:
Science concepts were mostly misconceptions.
5 Rating:
A number of related concepts or a single concept with several sub-concepts, unfamiliar to lay persons are illustrated. 		4 Rating:
Some concepts are missing, but most concepts are unfamiliar to a lay person.		 2-3 Rating:
Few science concepts are discussed or illustrated, concepts would be familiar to a lay person.		 0-1 Rating:
No Science concepts are included.
5 Rating:
Book is at the proper cognitive level for middle school.		 4 Rating:
Mainly a children's book but some parts is at too high of a cognitive level for middle school.		 2-3 Rating:
Partially a children's book but much of it is at too high or too low of a cognitive level for middle school.		 0-1 Rating:
Almost none of it is a children's book. It is mostly at too high or too low of a cognitive level for middle school.
5 Rating:
The book has a story line that is original and easy to follow.

4 Rating:
Most of the story line is original and easy to follow.

 2-3 Rating:
Only some of the story is original or story line is disconnected/didn't make sense.		 0-1 Rating:
None of the story is original or there is no clear story line.
5 Rating:
Original illustrations convey information/illustrate concepts and add to the book's ability to teach.		 4 Rating:
Original illustrations convey information/illustrate concepts in the book		 2-3 Rating:
All illustrations are original and not copied from books or the Web but are related to the story only in a superficial way.		 0-1 Rating:
None of the illustrations are original or illustrations are not related to story.

Analytical Rubric for Earth Science Scrapbook- Total 25 points

 

Best 

Good

Passing

# captioned items
(15%)

10

8

6

Variety
(15%)

(also see comments below)

at least 3 topics*

4 or more sources*

a mix of pictures and news stories or articles

at least 2 topics*

at least 3 sources*

heavily articles or news stories; only pictures
 

at least 2 topics*

at least 2 sources*

all articles or news stories

Content:
% correct
(25%)

> 90%

> 70%

> 50%

Quality of content
(35%)

Earth science content information unfamiliar to lay persons is applied to each  item, in many cases caption includes information about geologic processes.  Caption is in student's own words and it is clear that ideas have not been cribbed from item's source. 

Earth science content information unfamiliar to lay persons is applied to each  item, in some cases caption includes information about geologic processes. Caption is in student's own words. 

Two thirds of the captions include Earth science content information unfamiliar to lay persons. Caption is in student's own words. 

Professionalism of presentation
(10%)

Items are neat and aesthetically presented, organized by topic, captions typed, all items are fully referenced. 

Items are neat, most items are referenced, captions are typed. 

Captions are legible, most items are referenced, some items missing parts of references.

Analytical Rubric for Weather or Not- Total 25 points

Identification of weather content and rationale (your research question)

5 Rating:
Identification of weather concepts is analyzed with detailed explanations and rationale for data collection (research question).

4 Rating:
Identification of weather concepts is analyzed with some explanations and rationale for data collection (research question).

2-3 Rating:
Identification of weather concepts is incomplete and not analyzed with explanations and rationale for data collection (research question).

0-1 Rating:
Weather concepts are not identified or explained. Wrong rationale for data collection (research question).

Data Collection

5 Rating:
Comprehensively collects data on 2 areas of the world and documents in a consistent fashion.

4 Rating:
Adequately collects data on 2 areas of the world and documents in a consistent fashion.

2-3 Rating:
Collects data and documents in an inconsistent fashion, perhaps only one area of the world, or inconsistent for both.

0-1 Rating:
Collects data and documents in an incomplete fashion: only one area- or incomplete data for both areas.

Organization and display of information/Trends

5 Rating:
Project is organized with relevant sources and graphs and/or charts to show trends and important information.

4 Rating:
Project is sometimes organized with relevant sources and and graphs and/or charts to show trends.

2-3 Rating:
Project is organized, but relevant sources and and graphs and/or charts are not in a logical order or design.

0-1 Rating:
Project is not organized and it is difficult to see what the student studied or collected data on.

Sources

5 Rating:
All sources used for quotes and concepts are credible and cited correctly.

4 Rating:
All sources used for quotes and concepts are credible and most are cited correctly.

2-3 Rating:
Most sources used for quotes and concepts are credible and cited correctly.

0-1 Rating:
Many sources used for quotes and concepts are less than credible (suspect) and/or are not cited correctly.

Analysis and Conclusion of the research question

5 Rating:
The analysis is strong and uses the data to support the conclusion.The research question is answered.

4 Rating:
The conclusion is recognizable and ties up almost all the loose ends by referring to the data.

2-3 Rating:
The conclusion is recognizable, but does not tie up several loose ends by using the data for support.

0-1 Rating:
There is no clear conclusion, the data is not used for analysis.

 

Growing Crystals Portfolio Element Rubric

 

5

4

3

2-0

Quantity of notes and observations

Daily and some cases more frequent observations and/or measurements

Daily observations and/or measurements

Some observations and/or measurements are missing

Few observations and/or measurements were recorded

Quality of notes and observations

Observations are very detailed and contain meaningful descriptions, quantities and sizes are measured where appropriate

Observations are fairly detailed and contain meaningful descriptions; some quantities and sizes are measured.

Observations are not detailed and contain few meaningful descriptions; few quantities and sizes are measured.

Critical observations are missing and/or appropriate measurements are missing

Number and level of questions in notes

There are many questions in notes, a significant portion are at an elevated cognitive level. Questions are open-ended, probing, and are connected to observations

There are a fair number of questions in notes, some are at an elevated cognitive level. Some questions are open-ended, probing, and are connected to observations

There are some questions in notes, few are at an elevated cognitive level. Few questions are open-ended, probing, and are connected to observations

There are very few questions in notes, most are simple closed questions and many are not clearly connected to observations

Report completeness & professionalism

Report has all required sections and all sections are complete; background information has been included, observations are appropriate and complete. Report is neat, organized and professional.

Report has all required sections and all sections are essentially complete. Report could be neater or better, organized.

Report has all required sections but some sections are not complete.

Sections are missing or very abbreviated report is messy, and/or disorganized.

Report quality

Report is focused on research question, all observations are considered in discussion section. Analysis in discussion section integrates observations and background information.

Report is not clearly focused on research question, or all observations are not considered in discussion section or analysis in discussion section fails to integrate observations and background information.

Report is not clearly focused on research question, some observations are not considered in discussion section or analysis in discussion section is segmented and disconnected

Report is unfocussed, discussion section is very simple, too short or missing

 

Rubric for pH Chemistry Element

 

 

5

4

3

2

1-0

Understanding of the project

Complete understanding of the project, demonstrated by explaining and answering all questions asked; explanations indicating a clear and accurate understanding of scientific principles underlying the construction and modifications.

 

Moderate understanding of the project, demonstrated by scarce explanation and answers to the questions asked

 

 

Little understanding of the project, demonstrated by some wrong and some incomplete explanation and answers to the questions asked

 

 

Very little understanding of the project, demonstrated by missing or wrong explanation and answers to the questions asked

 

No understanding of the project, demonstrated by providing no explanation and answers to the questions asked

 

Construction: material.

Conclusions drawn

Appropriate materials were selected and a coherent and accurate conclusion of the experiment was presented

Appropriate materials were selected and there was an attempt to provide coherent conclusion of the experiment was presented

Appropriate materials were selected.

In some cases inappropriate materials were selected and contributed to a product that performed poorly.

Inappropriate materials were selected and contributed to a product that performed poorly.

Reporting data:

 

a- Experimental section

Experimental sections provide:

i- a complete record of planning,

ii- construction,

iii- testing,

iv- modifications and reasons for modifications,

v- some reflection about the strategies used and the results.

Experimental sections provide:

i- complete record of planning,

ii- construction, iii- testing,

iv- modifications, and reasons for modifications.

Experimental sections provide:

i- quite a bit of detail about planning,

ii- construction,

 

Experimental sections provide:

some detail about planning,

 

Experimental sections provide:

very little or no detail about several aspects of the planning, construction, and testing process.

Reporting data:

 

b- Table entries

Tables provide:

i- all testing done

ii- neat and organized/creative

iii- data taken in a careful, reliable manner.

Tables provide:

i- all testing done

ii- data taken in a careful, reliable manner.

Tables provide:

all testing done

 

Tables provide:

some tests missing

Tables provide:

very little detail about several testing process and date collection.

Labeled pictures and

i- all 7 pictures taken

ii- pictures accurately depicting the data

iii- accurately labeled

i- all 7 pictures taken

ii- pictures accurately depicting the data

 

i- all 7 pictures taken

ii- only some pictures accurately depicting the data

 

not all 7 pictures taken

 

no pictures taken

 

Astronomy Element Rubric

 

Element : Observing Phases of the Moon

CATEGORY

7

3

0

Photo Integrity

 

 

Lunar photographs were not completed by the student and appear to be from some other source. LAB GRADE = 0

Photographs

One photo for each phase was properly submitted. (1 point per photo.)

 

 No photographs turned in.

Data

Phase, altitude, and time are consistent with each other for each photo submitted.

(1 point per data set.)

 

 No data included or was inconsistent.

Questions

 

All questions correctly answered.

 No questions answered correctly.

Quadrant

 

Student correctly constructed and used a quadrant.

 No quadrant submitted.

 

 

 

 

Total = 20 points