1.

Rubrics (optional)

5.1. Grading checklist

Grading checklist for Written Reports
Student: …………………………….. HW/Assignment: ……………….
Date: ………………………………… Evaluator: ………………………
Max. Score Comments
Technical content (60%)
Abstract clearly identifies purpose and summarizes principal 10
content
Introduction demonstrates thorough knowledge of relevant 15
background and prior work
Analysis and discussion demonstrate good subject mastery 30
Summary and conclusions appropriate and complete 5
Organization (10%)
Distinct introduction, body, conclusions 5
Content clearly and logically organized, good transitions 5
Presentation (20%)
Correct spelling, grammar, and syntax 10
Clear and easy to read 10
Quality of Layout and Graphics (10%) 10
TOTAL SCORE 100

5.2. Holistic rubric

Holistic rubric for evaluating the entire document, e.g., exercises/quizzes/HW
Scor Description
e
5 Demonstrates complete understanding of the problem. All requirements of task are included in
response
4 Demonstrates considerable understanding of the problem. All requirements of task are
included.
3 Demonstrates partial understanding of the problem. Most requirements of task are included.
2 Demonstrates little understanding of the problem. Many requirements of task are missing.
1 Demonstrates no understanding of the problem.
0 No response/task not attempted
Note: this rubric is also used to evaluate questions in an exam.

5.3. Analytic rubric

Critical thinking value rubric for evaluating questions in exams:
Capstone Milestone Benchmark
4 3 2 1
Issue/ problem to be
Issue/ problem to be considered critically is
Issue/ problem to be considered critically is stated but description
considered critically is stated stated, described, and leaves some terms Issue/ problem to be
clearly and described clarified so that undefined, ambiguities considered critically is
comprehensively, delivering all understanding is not unexplored, boundaries stated without
Explanation of relevant information necessary seriously impeded by undetermined, and/ or clarification or
issues for full understanding. omissions. backgrounds unknown. description.
 Information is taken
from source(s) with
some interpretation/
Information is taken from Information is taken from evaluation, but not
source(s) with enough source(s) with enough enough to develop a Information is taken
Evidence interpretation/ evaluation to interpretation/ evaluation coherent analysis or from source(s) without
Selecting and using develop a comprehensive to develop a coherent synthesis. Viewpoints of any interpretation/
information to analysis or synthesis. analysis or synthesis. experts are taken as evaluation. Viewpoints
investigate a point of Viewpoints of experts are Viewpoints of experts are mostly fact, with little of experts are taken as
view or conclusion questioned thoroughly. subject to questioning. questioning. fact, without question.
Shows an emerging
Questions some awareness of present
assumptions. Identifies assumptions
Thoroughly (systematically several relevant contexts (sometimes labels
and methodically) analyzes when presenting a assertions as
own and others' assumptions Identifies own and others' position. May be more assumptions). Begins
and carefully evaluates the assumptions and several aware of others' to identify some
Influence of context relevance of contexts when relevant contexts when assumptions than one's contexts when
and assumptions presenting a position. presenting a position. own (or vice versa). presenting a position.
Specific position (perspective,
thesis/ hypothesis) is
imaginative, taking into Specific position
account the complexities of an (perspective,
issue. Limits of position thesis/hypothesis) takes
(perspective, thesis/ into account the
hypothesis) are acknowledged. complexities of an issue. Specific position Specific position
Others' points of view are Others' points of view are (perspective, thesis/ (perspective, thesis/
Student's position synthesized within position acknowledged within hypothesis) hypothesis) is stated,
(perspective, (perspective, thesis/ position (perspective, acknowledges different but is simplistic and
thesis/hypothesis) hypothesis). thesis/ hypothesis). sides of an issue. obvious.
Conclusion is logically
Conclusion is logically tied to information Conclusion is
Conclusions and related tied to a range of (because information is inconsistently tied to
outcomes (consequences and information, including chosen to fit the desired some of the
implications) are logical and opposing viewpoints; conclusion); some information discussed;
Conclusions and reflect student’s informed related outcomes related outcomes related outcomes
related outcomes evaluation and ability to place (consequences and (consequences and (consequences and
(implications and evidence and perspectives implications) are identified implications) are implications) are
consequences) discussed in priority order. clearly. identified clearly. oversimplified.
Source: Association of American Colleges and Universities

Oral communication value rubric for evaluating presentation tasks:

Capstone Milestone Benchmark
4 3 2 1
Organizational pattern
(specific introduction and Organizational pattern
conclusion, sequenced (specific introduction and Organizational pattern Organizational pattern
material within the body, conclusion, sequenced (specific introduction and (specific introduction and
and transitions) is clearly material within the body, conclusion, sequenced conclusion, sequenced
and consistently and transitions) is clearly material within the body, material within the body,
observable and is skillful and consistently and transitions) is and transitions) is not
and makes the content of observable within the intermittently observable observable within the
Organization the presentation cohesive. presentation. within the presentation. presentation.
Language choices are
Language choices are Language choices are mundane and
imaginative, memorable, thoughtful and generally commonplace and Language choices are
and compelling, and support the effectiveness partially support the unclear and minimally
enhance the effectiveness of the presentation. effectiveness of the support the effectiveness of
of the presentation. Language in presentation presentation. Language in the presentation. Language
Language in presentation is appropriate to presentation is in presentation is not
Language is appropriate to audience. audience. appropriate to audience. appropriate to audience.
Delivery Delivery techniques Delivery techniques Delivery techniques Delivery techniques
(posture, gesture, eye (posture, gesture, eye (posture, gesture, eye (posture, gesture, eye
contact, and vocal contact, and vocal contact, and vocal contact, and vocal
expressiveness) make the expressiveness) make the expressiveness) make the expressiveness) detract
presentation compelling, presentation interesting, presentation from the understandability
and speaker appears and speaker appears understandable, and of the presentation, and
 speaker appears
polished and confident. comfortable. speaker appears tentative. uncomfortable.
A variety of types of
supporting materials Supporting materials Supporting materials
(explanations, examples, (explanations, examples, (explanations, examples, Insufficient supporting
illustrations, statistics, illustrations, statistics, illustrations, statistics, materials (explanations,
analogies, quotations from analogies, quotations analogies, quotations examples, illustrations,
relevant authorities) make from relevant authorities) from relevant authorities) statistics, analogies,
appropriate reference to make appropriate make appropriate quotations from relevant
information or analysis reference to information reference to information authorities) make reference
that significantly supports or analysis that generally or analysis that partially to information or analysis
the presentation or supports the presentation supports the presentation that minimally supports the
establishes the presenter's or establishes the or establishes the presentation or establishes
Supporting credibility/ authority on presenter's credibility/ presenter's credibility/ the presenter's credibility/
Material the topic. authority on the topic. authority on the topic. authority on the topic.
Central message is
compelling (precisely Central message is Central message can be
stated, appropriately Central message is clear basically understandable deduced but is not
repeated, memorable, and and consistent with the but is not often repeated explicitly stated in the
Central Message strongly supported.) supporting material. and is not memorable. presentation.
Source: Association of American Colleges and Universities