Science Fair Rubrics Criterion A: Science in the World - Objectives

Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 Descriptor
The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. Objectives are poorly conceived or lacking in all 3 areas Objectives are lacking in 2 areas: clarity, appropriate level, or creativity Objectives are lacking in one area: clarity, appropriate level, or creativity Objectives are clearly stated and well-written appropriate for grade level and original creative approach to problem solving What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher:

Comments:

Criterion C: Inquiring and Designing – Hypothesis
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher: Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. Hypothesis missing or poorly defined. Hypothesis incomplete or not testable. Hypothesis present, but not completely testable Testable, clear, bounded hypothesis What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

Comments:

Criterion A: Science in the World – Use of Resources
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. – No sources or citations – Project suffered as a result of not using available resources – Internet resources are not scientific or reputable – Minimal effort on citing sources – Used some available resources – Some internet resources are scientific & reputable – Incomplete citations – Used most available resources – Most internet resources are scientific & reputable - A comprehensive, correctly formatted bibliography was included & footnotes are present in text and display - Student(s) used full resources available (e.g. labs, advisors, experts, scientific periodicals & texts, internet) What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher:

Comments:

Criterion C: Inquiring and Designing – Design and Procedures (Plan)
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher: Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. - Sufficient plan with 1-2 of 4 other criteria for excellence met, or - Plan information is unclear / missing / insufficient, - Sufficient plan with 3 of 4 other criteria for excellence met or - Exemplary plan and 2 of 4 other criteria for excellence met - Sufficient plan to support / refute hypothesis with all other criteria met, or - Exemplary plan and 3 of 4 other criteria for excellence met - Exemplary, creative plan to support / refute hypothesis with valid testing - Sequential experimental procedures are quantitatively and/or qualitatively listed, and connect hypothesis, data & results What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

Comments:

Criterion C: Inquiring and Designing – Design and Procedures (Procedures)
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher: Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. - procedures are lacking or grossly deficient - major improvements needed throughout - some improvements needed throughout - Procedures are logical and repeatable - Sample sizes, number of trials are sufficient. Valid control group. - All other variables are carefully controlled What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

Comments:

Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry – Data and Results
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher: Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. - Incorrect experiments and data analysis for hypothesis - Insufficient data - 1 of the 3 criteria for excellence met - Major improvements required - 2 of the 3 criteria for excellence met - Some improvements could be made - Experiments run are appropriate for hypothesis being tested - Sufficient data. Repetition of experiments - Correct & appropriate statistical tests run What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

Comments:

Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry – Documentation (notebook)
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. – 1 of the standards for excellence were met or – No notebook or missing – 2 of 4 standards for excellence were met or – Major improvements required – 3 of 4 standards for excellence were met or – Some improvements could be made – Clearly written, complete and clear – Procedures are easy to follow – Comments, observations included – Records include dates, signatures
What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

What level do you think you should get?

Level awarded by your teacher:

Comments:

Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry – Discussion & Conclusions
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. - No discussion / conclusions provided - 1 of 3 criteria for excellence met or - Overall information is lacking in quality and perspective - 2 of 3 criteria for excellence met, or - Some improvements could be made - Status of the hypothesis is correctly and logically addressed, and stated in an unbiased manner (confirmed / refuted) - Completeness of work and validity of conclusions are substantiated - Discussion is insightful, demonstrates clear understanding of research project, broader subject & suggested new work What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher:

Comments:

Criterion B: Using Knowledge (Interview)
Achievement Level 0 1-2 Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below. Poor understanding… – Cannot answer questions adequately and precisely – Does not incorporate display into interview – Unfamiliar with related background information Fair understanding… – Research findings – Ability to interpret graphs, statistics, etc… – Related background information Good understanding... – Research findings – Ability to interpret graphs, statistics, etc. – Related background information Exemplary understanding… – Research findings / design results – Ability to interpret graphs, statistics, etc... – Related background information – Project rational, details & validity What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

3-4

5-6

7-8

What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher:

Comments:

Criterion B: Using Knowledge (Display)
Achievement Level 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 What level do you think you should get? Level awarded by your teacher: Descriptor The student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below.
Poor display… -- Confusing, unorganized, incorrect or inappropriate information Fair display … -- Some information is appropriate, organized and easily accessible. Good display -- Most information is appropriate, organized and easily accessible. Exemplary display… -- Creativity, clarity, logic, interpretability, construction, writing, graphics, grammar -- All information directly relates to project

What did you do well? What do you think you could have done better?

Comments:

Science Fair Rubrics Totals: Criterion A: Science in the World – Objectives - 8 Total Criterion C: Inquiring and Designing – Hypothesis - 8 Total Criterion A: Science in the World – Use of Resources - 8 Total Criterion C: Inquiring and Designing – Design and Procedures (Plan) - 8 Total Criterion C: Inquiring and Designing – Design and Procedures (Procedures) - 8 Total Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry – Data and Results - 8 Total Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry – Documentation (notebook) - 8 Total Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry – Discussion & Conclusions - 8 Total Criterion B: Using Knowledge (Interview) - 8 Total Criterion B: Using Knowledge (Display) - 8 Total