This document outlines the rubrics for evaluating a case study portfolio worth 20% of the grade in a Diploma in Science program. It evaluates students on four attributes: creation, conceptualization, implementation, and curation. Each attribute has levels ranging from very weak to very good, with associated point values from 0.6 to 4. The rubric provides descriptions of the skills and qualifications needed to achieve each level for consolidating and presenting case study information.
This document outlines the rubrics for evaluating a case study portfolio worth 20% of the grade in a Diploma in Science program. It evaluates students on four attributes: creation, conceptualization, implementation, and curation. Each attribute has levels ranging from very weak to very good, with associated point values from 0.6 to 4. The rubric provides descriptions of the skills and qualifications needed to achieve each level for consolidating and presenting case study information.
This document outlines the rubrics for evaluating a case study portfolio worth 20% of the grade in a Diploma in Science program. It evaluates students on four attributes: creation, conceptualization, implementation, and curation. Each attribute has levels ranging from very weak to very good, with associated point values from 0.6 to 4. The rubric provides descriptions of the skills and qualifications needed to achieve each level for consolidating and presenting case study information.
RUBRICS FOR CASE STUDY PORTFOLIO (20%) Attribute Level Marks Marks Sub Attribute Very Weak Weak Fair Good Very Good (0.6) (1.2) (2.4) (3.2) (4) Able to create a new Able to create a new Able to create a new Able to create new Not able to create any Creation idea with substantial idea /product with some idea /product without ideas /product beyond 4 new idea/ product. assistance. assistance. assistance. expectation. Very Weak Weak Fair Good Very Good Digital Application (0.6) (1.2) (1.8) (2.4) (3) Able to generate a new Able to generate a new Able to generate new Able to generate a Not able to generate idea or ideas with some idea or ideas that is or idea or ideas that have Conceptualization simple idea or an idea 3 any new idea. help from lecturer or are relevant and potential to be applied, independently. colleagues. appropriate. has depth and quality. Able to compare a Able to identify a Able to identify a variety of strategies / Able to identify a variety of strategies / Able to apply the same variety of strategies / ideas / solutions, variety of strategies / ideas / solutions, strategy / old ideas / old ideas / solutions, but evaluates and chooses Implementation ideas / solutions and chooses an appropriate 3 solutions to solve needs assistance to the most effective, and able to choose an one, and applies the problems. choose an appropriate applies the strategies to appropriate one. strategies individually one. improve the situations or in combination. or solve the problem. Very Weak Weak Fair Good Very Good (0.6) (1.2) (2.4) (3.2) (4) Not able to curate for Limited curation for Satisfactory curation for Good curation for Excellent curation for Curation 4 required information. required information. required information. required information. required information. Very Weak Weak Fair Good Very Good (0.6) (1.2) (1.8) (2.4) (3) Information Able to retrieve Able to retrieve Able to retrieve Able to retrieve Not able to retrieve Optimisation information from information from information from many information from 3 information minimal references sufficient reference references maximum references Minimally fulfil the Partially fulfil the List of references Fail to fulfil the required Fulfil the required Exceed the required required number of required number of 3 number of references. number of references. number of references. references. references. Total 20