View as Microsoft Word* | View as PDF

Project Rubric-The Earth Moves Under My Feet

	4	3	2	1
Content and Understanding	Our task force completed all seven of the following components: Public service announcement and emergency broadcast system Soil analysis and building structure guidelines Description of equipment used for predictions Prediction data and seismic data for the area shown on maps with a classification system Analysis of any patterns in occurrences that emerge History of activity in the area, visually represented Research on the relationships between earthquakes and other natural disasters Our plan demonstrates in-depth understanding of earthquakes. Our emergency plan offers unique recommendations and actions specific to the area assigned, and are backed by research and experimentation.	Our task force completed six of the following components: Public service announcement and emergency broadcast system Soil analysis and building structure guidelines Description of equipment used for predictions Prediction data and seismic data for the area shown on maps with a classification system Analysis of any patterns in occurrences that emerge History of activity in the area, visually represented Research on the relationships between earthquakes and other natural disasters Our plan demonstrates an understanding of earthquakes but overlooks or misunderstands some supporting ideas. Our emergency plan offers expected interpretations and recommendations for the area assigned. Information is backed by research.	Our task force completed four or five of the following components: Public service announcement and emergency broadcast system Soil analysis and building structure guidelines Description of equipment used for predictions Prediction data and seismic data for the area shown on maps with a classification system Analysis of any patterns in occurrences that emerge History of activity in the area, visually represented Research on the relationships between earthquakes and other natural disasters Our plan demonstrates gaps in conceptual understanding of earthquakes. Our emergency plan does not take into account the unique attributes of the area assigned. Research supporting the plan is weak.	Our task force completed three or fewer of the following components: Public service announcement and emergency broadcast system Soil analysis and building structure guidelines Description of equipment used for predictions Prediction data and seismic data for the area shown on maps with a classification system Analysis of any patterns in occurrences that emerge History of activity in the area, visually represented Research on the relationships between earthquakes and other natural disasters Our plan demonstrates little evidence of understanding of earthquakes. Our emergency plan is illogical or irrelevant.
Process	Our task force chooses sophisticated processes to complete and present the emergency plan. The workload is divided and shared equally by all members. The final product is cohesive (seamless integration of work). Each stage of our project was completed on or ahead of time. Our group members supported each other, found ways to help each other in areas of weakness, and took advantage of each other’s areas of strength.	Our task force chooses processes to complete and present the emergency plan. The workload is divided and shared fairly by all members. Some cohesiveness is evident. Each stage of our project was completed on time. When problems arose, a reasonable attempt was made to work them out within the group.	Our task force requires assistance in choosing processes and completing the emergency plan. One group member is viewed as not doing a fair share of the work. Cohesiveness of the project is lacking. More than one stage of our project was late. Problems were ignored or exacerbated by group members’ responses.	Our task force needs assistance in choosing processes and completing basic steps of the plan. Several members of the group are viewed as not doing their fair share of the work. Project has no evidence of cohesiveness. Most of the stages of our project were late. Our group was dysfunctional and little or no efforts were made to resolve problems.
Presentation Content	Our presentation conveys clear, focused main ideas supported by well-chosen details and examples. Our graphics and data are informative and support the plan. Our presentation is designed to match the topic, audience, and purpose. The tools we used enhance the communication of the content.	Our presentation conveys main ideas, supported by relevant details and examples. Our graphics and data are used to support the information. Our presentation is designed to match the topic, audience, and purpose. The tools we used support the communication of the content.	Our presentation conveys a main idea but does not support it effectively. Our graphics or data are uninformative or we use them inadequately. Our presentation is designed in a way that may not effectively match the topic, audience, or purpose. The tools we used do not support the communication of the content.	Our presentation does not present or support a main idea. We do not use graphics. Our presentation does not match the topic, audience, or purpose. The tools we used interfere with the communication of the content.
Organization and Mechanics	Our information is presented in a clear sequence. We have clear connections, and transitions are made among the ideas or topics. Our formatting is consistent throughout the presentation. Proofreading is evident, and the work includes no errors. Our presentation uses headings or bulleted lists to organize. Our graphics are informative and support the plan. Slides are readable and appealing.	Our information is presented in order. Our ideas are connected. Our formatting is somewhat inconsistent, but it does not interfere with the presentation. Proofreading is somewhat evident, but our work includes some noticeable but not detractive errors. Our presentation uses headings or bulleted lists to organize, but the overall organization of topics appears flawed. Our graphics are informative but do not support the plan. Slides are readable but lack appeal.	Some of our information is out of order. Our ideas may not be connected. We have formatting inconsistencies that detract from the presentation. Proofreading is slightly evident, but errors detract from the presentation. Our content is logically organized for the most part. We use graphics, but not all of them are informative or support the plan. Slides are hard to read.	Our information is disorganized. Gaps in our information exist. We have inconsistent formatting that interferes with the presentation. Proofreading is barely or not evident. Our errors significantly detract from the presentation. We have no clear or logical organizational structure—just lots of facts. Our graphics are not used to support the plan or provide information.

Who worked on what? Input is required from all group members for all components.

< Return to Assessment Plan

< Return to The Earth Moves Under My Feet