iRubric: STEaM EDP or Scientific Method Project Rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

STEaM EDP or Scientific Method Project Rubric

Students create an innovative reconstruction or advancement from scratch of a product or building from various times in history. All projects must have a moving element except for building or bridge structures. Movement may be by electricity or some other means of motion such as steam, rubber bands, magnets, and such.

Rubric Code: A2XX838

By dwisniewski

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Engineering

Type: Project

Grade Levels: 6-8

STEaM Project Demonstrates high level of research, development and application of a concept from the era under investigation. Project may be an extension of the Career Leadership Research Paper for personal interest.
	Poor Little indication of research and development 1 pts	Fair Websites are questionable or inadequate. Project quivers if movement is required or is incomplete. Only 1 iteration, the first one, was completed. 2 pts	Good Project moves, if it applies, even if not continuously. At least 2 iterations were completed indicating project development and at least one improvement. Reliable sources researched. 3 pts	Excellent Project moves consistently if applicable. Three iterations were completed over a 3 week timeframe indicating project development along with multiple improvements and design completion. Numerous reliable sources used. 4 pts
Construction Upcycled materials utilized whenever possible. Project is made from scratch not a kit. Design is developed and researched before built.	Poor Quality of work is poor. Does not appear to have been well researched or applied findings to the project at hand.	Fair Quality of work is fair. Some research is evident but end product doe not adequately display the purpose of the device, product or structure in its time.	Good Quality of work is good but final product could be refined to represent a rendition or innovation of the project from history.	Excellent Quality of work is excellent. It is evident how this project represents the period in which it was relevant, and/or students have improved on te design to better represent the product if created in current times.
Identiifcation A vision sketch, blueprints and a 3D (TinkerCAD) rendition of the product is used to create the final project. Depending on the project selected, the Steps of the Engineering Design Process (EDP) or Scientific Method are included.	Poor Parts of the product are not labeled as required in the blueprints. Steps of the EDP or Scientific Method are not followed.	Fair Some of the parts are indicated but not all and some are mislabeled in the blueprints. Some of the steps of the EDP or Scientific Method (depending on the chosen project) are followed, but not thoroughly, as prescribed.	Good Most of the parts are labeled in the blueprints and the steps of the EDP or Scientific Method are followed in accordance to the project option elected.	Excellent All parts are labeled correctly in the blueprints, presentation and their purpose is apparent. The steps of the EDP or the Scientific Method is followed and looped with repeated steps indicated as needed to thoroughly complete the process to completion.
STEM Packet & Procedures Packet is followed, thought provoking questions are answered and initiate further project ideas and development. Pictures and daily progress are uploading to the digital notebook and used to develop the final visual multimedia presentation.	Poor Most outlined questions are not answered. The few answers given were not well thought out nor do they represent an understanding of the project and its purpose or the steps needed to complete the Engineering Design Process or the Scientific Method.	Fair Some questions are answered but without depth or complexity of comprehension of the process and the project was insufficiently researched to adequately answer said steps.	Good All questions are answered with acceptable understanding of the Engineering Design Process and/or Scientific Method, as they apply, and that sufficient research is evidenced in responses given. Answers show a good understanding of the subject.	Excellent All questions are answered thoroughly, utilizing Socratic Questioning Techniques in conjunction with obvious evidence of extensive research, exceptional following of the Engineering Design Process or Scientific Method with details and depth of understanding.
Materials List of potential materials Upcyclabled materials preferred when possible Each team member provides one purchased item: duct tape, hot glue sticks, electrical tape, glue, batteries or project specific needs. Class provides the motors, glue guns and other required materials for all.	Poor Individuals did not provide the one item required for the team to complete said STEaM project nor did they bring in upcycled materials.	Fair Materials were not brought in by all members of the STEaM team, neither the purchased item nor the upcycled materials needed to develop the product.	Good Each member of the team not only purchased one item to assist in the completion of the project, they all also brought in the recycled materials needed to build the prototype.	Excellent Team went up and beyond the basic suggested materials both purchased and recycled and used them with conservation and precision of use of materials to avoid waste.
EDP (or Scientific Method) Procedure ID Problem, Brainstorm, Sketch, Build, Redesign, Communicate Results.	Poor No procedures followed. Fragmented in step by step process.	Fair Incomplete procedure identified.	Good Complete procedures listed. Neat and organized.	Excellent Complete, thorough organization including the looped steps of the EDP that normally repeat themselves throughout the process from Iteration 1 to Iteration 2 and 3 and the final product.
Trials 1-3 Iterations Recommended within allotted time	Poor No evidence of repeated iterations of the final prototype.	Fair Inconsistent evidence of improvements to the prototype.	Good At least two iterations were made to 5 trials and changes to evidence improvements.	Excellent Evidence that trials resulted in effective design improvements and results for final prototype.
Vision, 2D Graphs and 3D TinkerCad Rendition Vision Sketch, then 2D Front, Side and Top or Bottom views true to scale blueprints, with a key, labeled, metric or inches and a 3D (TinkerCAD) rendition of final prototype is provided.	Poor Only one visual not three are evidenced	Fair Vision Sketch plus a 2D or 3D rendition to scale but not all 3 are provided and they may not be proportionally correct.	Good Vision Sketch and both 2D and 3D graphs provided but scales and key are not indicated.	Excellent All required visuals are included and to scale and accurately depicted.
EDP and/or Scientific Method Journal Evidence Define the Problem Background Research Specify Requirements Brainstorm Solutions Choose the Best Solution Do Development Work Build a Prototype Test and Redesign	Poor Less than four step of the EDP or Scientific Method are identified:	Fair Less than six steps of the EDP or Scientific Method are identified.	Good Less than eight steps of the EDP and/or the Scientific Method are completed:	Excellent All steps of the EDP and/or Scientific Method are evidenced, including Design & Redesign.

Subjects:

Types:

Project

Discuss this rubric