Evaluation
The Rubric for Operation Eyewitness
Name_______________________ Date___________ Class_______________
Operative performance, check job: ___spy ___journalist ___scientist ___WC expert
Criteria |
Exceptional |
Admirable |
Acceptable |
Amateur |
PARTICIPATION |
||||
Effort |
Did a full share of the work—or more |
Did an equal share of the work |
Did almost as much work as others |
Did less work than others |
Ideas |
Provided many ideas for the discussions and final report |
Participated in discussions about the group activities and final report |
Listened to others; on some occasions, made comments |
Seemed bored with group activities and conversations, contributed little |
Gave Feedback |
Gave feedback to others that dignified |
Gave feedback in ways that did not offend |
Sometimes hurt feelings of others with feedback |
Was openly rude when giving feedback |
Accepted Feedback |
Accepted feedback from others willingly |
Reluctantly accepted feedback |
Argued own point of view over feedback |
Refused to listen to feedback |
FINAL REPORT |
||||
Organization |
Extremely well organized; logical format that was easy to follow; flowed smoothly from one idea to the next |
Presented in a thoughtful manner; there were signs of organization and most transitions were easy to follow; at times ideas were unclear |
Somewhat organized; ideas were not presented coherently; transitions were not always smooth, which at times distracted the reader |
Choppy and confusing; format was difficult to follow; transitions of ideas were abrupt and seriously distracted the reader |
Content Accuracy |
Completely accurate; all facts were precise and complete |
Mostly accurate; a few inconsistencies or errors in information |
Somewhat accurate; more than a few inconsistencies or errors |
Completely inaccurate; the facts in the report were misleading to the reader |
Research from Web Quest |
Went above and beyond to understand and apply information; brought personal ideas and information to enhance the report |
Did a very good job of researching the WQ; utilized materials to their full potential |
Used the material provided in an acceptable manner, but did not consider the implications of the material |
Did not utilize resources effectively; did little or no fact gathering on the topic |
Presentation |
Captured the interest of the reader and maintained this throughout the entire report. Great use of vivid verbs and sentence variety |
Was well written and interesting to the reader; good use of verbs and sentence variety |
Was at time interesting and was presented clearly and precisely; limited variety of verbs and sentence types |
Writing was not easy to follow and did not keep the reader’s interest; sentence types and verbs used were bland and predictable |
Mechanics |
1-2 minor errors in grammar, spelling, or punctuation; no run-on sentences; typed, double spaced, 12 pt., 1" margins, indented paragraphs, centered title with member names |
3-4 minor errors in grammar, spelling, or punctuation; no run-on sentences; typed, double spaced, 12 pt., 1" margins, indented paragraphs, centered title with member names |
5 or more minor errors in grammar, spelling, or punctuation; or one run-on sentence; typed, double spaced, 12 pt., 1" margins, indented paragraphs, centered title with member names |
Significant errors in grammar, spelling, or punctuation; or two or more run-on sentences; or report not typed; or report with incorrect font size, margins, paragr. indentations, or title/names missing |
Comments: