Skip to main content
iRubric: ELECTION PBL rubric

iRubric: ELECTION PBL rubric

find rubric

(draft) edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
ELECTION PBL 
DRIVING QUESTION: How do we convince voters to vote a certain way?
Rubric Code: HX6C6W3
By csirmon
Draft
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Project  
Grade Levels: 9-12

Powered by iRubric ELECTION PBL
Enter rubric description
  Excellent

4 pts

Good

3 pts

Fair

2 pts

Poor

1 pts

Analysis of Rhetorical Devices

Excellent

Analyzes both the features and rhetorical devices of different public documents (policy statements, speeches, debates, platforms) and the way in which authors use those features and devices
Good

Mostly analyzes both the features and rhetorical devices of different public documents (policy statements, speeches, debates, platforms) and the way in which authors use those features and devices
Fair

Semi-analyzes both the features and rhetorical devices of different public documents (policy statements, speeches, debates, platforms) and the way in which authors use those features and devices
Poor

Does not analyze both the features and rhetorical devices of different public documents (policy statements, speeches, debates, platforms) and the way in which authors use those features and devices
Ability to Verify/Clarify

Excellent

Verifies and clarifies facts presented in other types of expository texts by using a variety of consumer, workplace, and public documents.
Good

Mostly verifies and clarifies facts presented in other types of expository texts by using a variety of consumer, workplace, and public documents.
Fair

Semi-verifies and clarifies facts presented in other types of expository texts by using a variety of consumer, workplace, and public documents.
Poor

Does not verify or clarify facts presented in other types of expository texts by using a variety of consumer, workplace, and public documents.
Criticism of Candidates

Excellent

Critiques the power, validity, and truthfulness of arguments set forth in public documents; their appeal to both friendly and hostile audiences; and the extent to which the arguments anticipate and address reader concerns and counterclaims (appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos)
Good

Mostly critiques the power, validity, and truthfulness of arguments set forth in public documents; their appeal to both friendly and hostile audiences; and the extent to which the arguments anticipate and address reader concerns and counterclaims (appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos)
Fair

Semi-critiques the power, validity, and truthfulness of arguments set forth in public documents; their appeal to both friendly and hostile audiences; and the extent to which the arguments anticipate and address reader concerns and counterclaims (appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos)
Poor

Does not critique the power, validity, and truthfulness of arguments set forth in public documents; their appeal to both friendly and hostile audiences; and the extent to which the arguments anticipate and address reader concerns and counterclaims (appeal to ethos, pathos, and logos)
Recognition of Strategies

Excellent

Recognizes strategies used by the media to inform, persuade, entertain, and transmit culture (advertisements, perpetuation of stereotypes, use of visual representations, special effects, language).
Good

Mostly recognizes strategies used by the media to inform, persuade, entertain, and transmit culture (advertisements, perpetuation of stereotypes, use of visual representations, special effects, language).
Fair

Semi-recognizes strategies used by the media to inform, persuade, entertain, and transmit culture (advertisements, perpetuation of stereotypes, use of visual representations, special effects, language).
Poor

Does not recognize strategies used by the media to inform, persuade, entertain, and transmit culture (advertisements, perpetuation of stereotypes, use of visual representations, special effects, language).
Analysis of Impact

Excellent

Analyzes the impact of the media on the democratic process (exerting influence on elections, creating images of leaders, shaping attitudes).
Good

Mostly analyzes the impact of the media on the democratic process (exerting influence on elections, creating images of leaders, shaping attitudes).
Fair

Semi-analyzes the impact of the media on the democratic process (exerting influence on elections, creating images of leaders, shaping attitudes).
Poor

Does not analyze the impact of the media on the democratic process (exerting influence on elections, creating images of leaders, shaping attitudes).
Rhetorical Appeals

Excellent

Uses logical, ethical, and emotional appeals that enhance a specific tone and purpose.
Good

Mostly uses logical, ethical, and emotional appeals that enhance a specific tone and purpose.
Fair

Semi-uses logical, ethical, and emotional appeals that enhance a specific tone and purpose.
Poor

Does not use logical, ethical, and emotional appeals that enhance a specific tone and purpose.
Understanding

Excellent

Identifies logical fallacies used in oral addresses (ad hominem, false causality, red herring, overgeneralization, bandwagon effect, etc.).
Good

Mostly identifies logical fallacies used in oral addresses (ad hominem, false causality, red herring, overgeneralization, bandwagon effect, etc.).
Fair

Semi-identifies logical fallacies used in oral addresses (ad hominem, false causality, red herring, overgeneralization, bandwagon effect, etc.).
Poor

Does not identify logical fallacies used in oral addresses (ad hominem, false causality, red herring, overgeneralization, bandwagon effect, etc.).
Analysis of Techniques

Excellent

Analyzes the techniques used in media messages for a particular audience and evaluate their effectiveness.
Good

Mostly analyzes the techniques used in media messages for a particular audience and evaluate their effectiveness.
Fair

Semi-analyzes the techniques used in media messages for a particular audience and evaluate their effectiveness.
Poor

Does not analyze the techniques used in media messages for a particular audience and evaluate their effectiveness.




Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
This rubric is still in draft mode and cannot be scored. Please change the rubric status to ready to use.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n16