ENGINEERING FACULTY UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SURAKARTA
Module Code: Modul :
Scoring Rubric for Teamwork
The scoring rubric provides descriptions of five levels of student performance
relating to Teamwork (where a score of 5 represents very good performance and a score of 1 represents very poor performance). The rubric is underpinned by specific behavioural indicators of Teamwork, these are: • Clear goals, agendas and ground-rules • Appropriate identification and utilization of team-roles • Use of facilitation skills and techniques in maximizing team performance and managing potential sources of conflict In scoring student performance, it is often the case that some students do not nicely relate to all the behavioural indicators in any one description of performance (e.g., they may fit most indicators quite well but are better or worse on the others). However, choose the description that you feel is the most appropriate in terms of the score to be given for the individual student.
Score Description of performance
5 Highly effective use of goal setting, agendas and ground rales of team conduct Team roles fully utilized for benefit of the team Facilitation skills and techniques are consistently well employed in maximizing team performance and managing potential sources of conflict 4 Overall good use of goal setting, agendas and ground rules of team conduct Team roles generally utilized for benefit of the team Facilitation skills and techniques are well employed in maximizing team performance and managing potential sources of conflict 3 Effective use of goal setting, agendas and ground rules of team conduct are only partly evident Team roles occasionally utilized for benefit of the team Some facilitation skills and techniques are employed in maximizing team performance and managing potential sources of conflict 2 Limited use of effective goal setting, agendas and ground rules of team conduct Team roles rarely utilized for benefit of the team Few facilitation skills and techniques employed in maximizing team performance and managing potential sources of conflict 1 A very poor performance in this area of competence INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING FACULTY UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SURAKARTA
Module Code: Modul :
Scoring Rubric for Oral Presentation Skills
The scoring rubric provides descriptions of five levels of student performance
relating to Oral Presentation (where a score of 5 represents very good performance and a score of 1 represents very poor performance). The rubric is underpinned by specific behavioural indicators of oral presentation, these are: • Clarity of voice, tone and modularity • Appropriateness of presentation structure and style to specific audience • Calibration of non verbal communication to the spoken words (e.g., posture, eye contact and gestures) • Answering questions in a clear, concise and focused manner. In scoring student performance, it is often the case that some students do not nicely relate to all the behavioural indicators in any one description of performance (e.g., they may fit most indicators quite well but are better or worse on the others). However, choose the description that you feel is the most appropriate in terms of the score to be given for the individual student.
Score Description of performance
5 Voice is consistently clear and effective in terms of tone and modularity. Presentation structure and style fully relates to audience. Non-verbal communication is highly calibrated to spoken word. All questions answered in a clear, concise and focused manner
4 Voice is generally clear and effective in terms of tone and modularity.
Presentation structure and style mainly relates to audience. Non- verbal communication is calibrated to spoken word. Most questions answered in a clear, concise and focused manner
3 Voice is occasionally clear and effective in terms of tone and
modularity. Presentation structure and style relates to audience in part Non-verbal communication is sometimes calibrated to spoken word. Some questions answered in a clear, concise and focused manner
2 Voice has limited clarity and effectiveness in terms of tone and
modularity. Presentation structure and style rarely relates to audience Non-verbal communication is mainly not calibrated to spoken word. Few questions answered in a clear, concise and focused manner
1 A very poor performance in this area of competence
INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING FACULTY UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SURAKARTA
Module Code: Modul :
Scoring Rubric for Written Communication in Report Writing
The scoring rubric provides descriptions of five levels of student performance
relating to of Written Communication in Report Writing (where a score of 5 represents very good performance and a score of 1 represents very poor performance). The rubric is underpinned by specific behavioural indicators of Written Communication in Report Writing, these are: • Adherence to technical report writing conventions (e.g., structure, sequencing, referencing, etc) • Clarity and appropriateness of language (e.g., grammar, vocabulary, tone and style, etc) in conveying meaning • Use of supporting presentational aids (e.g., diagrams, tables, charts, pictures, etc In scoring student performance, it is often the case that some students do not nicely relate to all the behavioural indicators in any one description of performance (e.g., they may fit most indicators quite well but are better or worse on the others). However, choose the description that you feel is the most appropriate in terms of the score to be given for the individual student.
Score Description of performance
5 Technical report writing conventions fully met Language use is consistently clear, appropriate and conveys meaning effectively Presentational aids fully support the written text 4 Technical report writing conventions met in the main Language use is mainly clear, appropriate and conveys meaning effectively Presentational aids largely support the written text 3 Technical report writing conventions met only in part Language use is sometimes clear, appropriate and conveys meaning effectively Presentational aids support the written text in part 2 Few technical report writing conventions met Language use is limited in clarity, appropriateness and conveying meaning effectively Presentational aids do not support the written text in the main 1 A very poor performance in this area of competence