Skip to main content

- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Scoring Rubric for Scientific Project Poster

iRubric: Scoring Rubric for Scientific Project Poster

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Scoring Rubric for Scientific Project Poster Scoring Rubric for Scientific Project Poster "Poster session" reflecting on how matter really matters. Rubric Code: NX93BBB By dsillapere Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Chemistry Type: Presentation Grade Levels: 9-12, Undergraduate

Criterion
	Substandard 1 pts	Poor 2 pts	Fair 3 pts	Good 4 pts	Excellent 5 pts
Layout / navigation of display	Substandard Poster layout is difficult to follow	Poor Poster is organized in vertical columns; however, sections are out of sequence	Fair Poster is organized in vertical columns and sequence of sections is appropriate	Good Poster is organized in vertical columns and sequence or flow of informations is appropriate; however, space is incorrectly allocated to unimportant information	Excellent Poster is organized in vertical columns and sequence or flow of information is appropriate Important sections are given more space
Overall visual appeal of display	Substandard Excessive use of text with little or no graphics Font is too small	Poor Appropriate use of graphics and text; however, font is too small	Fair Appealing combination of graphics and text; however, color or background picture is distracting Appropriate font (visible from 4 to 5 feet away) used	Good Appropriate use of graphics and text, but little color or few pictures Appropriate font (visible from 4 to 5 feet away) used	Excellent Appealing combination of graphics and text Appropriate font (visible from 4 to 5 feet away) used Color is used to emphasize and does not distract
Language usage	Substandard Inappropriate tense used Many spelling, punctuation, or grammatical errors	Poor Inappropriate tense used A few spelling, punctuation, or grammatical errors	Fair Appropriate tense used No spelling or punctuation errors, but grammatical errors are present	Good Appropriate tense used All grammar and spelling correct, but poor readability	Excellent Appropriate tense is used All grammar and spelling correct with high readability
Use of scientific terminology	Substandard Language is informal	Poor Language demonstrates basic knowledge from the core scientific disciplines; however, there is some incorrect use of scientific terms	Fair Language demonstrates basic knowledge from the core scientific disciplines; however, there is excessive use of jargon and/or acronyms are not defined	Good Language demonstrates basic knowledge from the core scientific disciplines Appropriate use of jargon, but acronyms are not defined	Excellent Language demonstrates basic knowledge from the core scientific disciplines Jargon is minimized and all acronyms are defined
Introduction	Substandard Provides information unrelated to the study	Poor Introduction and background are only peripherally related to the study	Fair Provides information related to the study, but gives too much information or is not appropriately referenced	Good Provides adequate background using a broad range of resources Justification for the study is more than adequate and is referenced correctly	Excellent Presents rationale and significance of research in the form of a well structured, logical argument that is appropriately referenced
Analysis of Substance	Substandard Substance is identified but none of the components are identified.	Poor Substance is identified but only some of the components are identified or the wrong components are identified.	Fair Substance is identified and all of its components are identified and it is fairly clear.	Good Substance is identified and all of its components are identified as well as some of the components that make up the components are identified.	Excellent Substance is identified and all of its components are identified as well the components that make up the components down to the elements contained in the substance are identified and discussed.
Method of Isolation or Discovery	Substandard Methods are not provided	Poor Methods are clear but not appropriate for the substance.	Fair Methods are likely appropriate for the substance but unclear	Good Methods are written clearly and specifically enough so that you could replicate the investigation Methods provide data that answer the research question, can be tied to existing data, and allow for comparisons	Excellent Methods are written clearly (to allow replication) and provide data that fully describe the production or isolation of the substance.
Social Evaluation	Substandard There is no social evaluation.	Poor There is a social evaluation but it is unclear and unsupported.	Fair There is a simple social evaluation and it is clear but unsupported.	Good There is a social evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Some specifics are employed.	Excellent There is a social evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Who is impacted, why we care and who and how it is determined that the substance is more important than any negative impacts is discussed.
Political Evaluation	Substandard There is no political evaluation.	Poor There is a political evaluation but it is unclear and unsupported.	Fair There is a simple political evaluation and it is clear but unsupported.	Good There is a political evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Some specifics are employed.	Excellent There is a political evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Who is impacted, why we care and who and how it is determined that the substance is more important than any negative impacts is discussed.
Economic Evaluation	Substandard There is no economic evaluation.	Poor There is a economic evaluation but it is unclear and unsupported.	Fair There is a economic evaluation and it is clear but unsupported.	Good There is an economic evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Some specifics are employed.	Excellent There is an economic evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Who is impacted, why we care and who and how it is determined that the substance is more important than any negative impacts is discussed.
Ethical Evaluation	Substandard There is no ethical evaluation.	Poor There is a ethical evaluation but it is unclear and unsupported.	Fair There is a ethical evaluation and it is clear but unsupported.	Good There is an ethical evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Some specifics are employed.	Excellent There is an ethical evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Who is impacted, why we care and who and how it is determined that the substance is more important than any negative impacts is discussed.
Moral Evaluation	Substandard There is no moral evaluation.	Poor There is a moral evaluation but it is unclear and unsupported.	Fair There is a moral evaluation and it is clear but unsupported.	Good There is a moral evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Some specifics are employed.	Excellent There is a moral evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Who is impacted, why we care and who and how it is determined that the substance is more important than any negative impacts is discussed.
Environmental Evaluation	Substandard There is no ethical evaluation.	Poor There is an environmental evaluation but it is unclear and unsupported.	Fair There is a ethical evaluation and it is clear but unsupported.	Good There is an ethical evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Some specifics are employed.	Excellent There is an ethical evaluation and it is clear, supported and uses additional examples. Who is impacted, why we care and who and how it is determined that the substance is more important than any negative impacts is discussed.
Works cited	Substandard References are not provided	Poor References are provided but are improperly cited	Fair References are cited properly but some were nonscientific sources or were out of date	Good References are cited properly and most were reliable scientific sources	Excellent All references were reliable, up-to-date scientific sources and cited properly according to MLA guidelines
Communication Skills	Substandard .	Poor BE Give and receive meaningful feedback Share ideas using multiple medias	Fair AE Give and receive meaningful feedback Share ideas using multiple medias	Good ME Give and receive meaningful feedback Share ideas using multiple medias	Excellent EE Give and receive meaningful feedback Share ideas using multiple medias
Collaboration Skills	Substandard	Poor BE Practice empathy help others succeed encourage others give/receive meaningful feedback	Fair AE Practice empathy help others succeed encourage others give/receive meaningful feedback	Good ME Practice empathy help others succeed encourage others give/receive meaningful feedback	Excellent EE Practice empathy help others succeed encourage others give/receive meaningful feedback
Affective Skills	Substandard	Poor BE Practice strategies to develop mental focus Manage self-talk Practice positive thinking.	Fair There is a environmental evaluation and it is clear but unsupported.	Good ME Practice strategies to develop mental focus Manage self-talk Practice positive thinking.	Excellent EE Practice strategies to develop mental focus Manage self-talk Practice positive thinking.

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More Chemistry rubrics

More Project rubrics

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

Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.

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 iRubric^tm.

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

n98