iRubric: Presidential Candidate Env. Issues Project 2016 rubric

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

Presidential Candidate Env. Issues Project 2016

Research two different presidential candidates for the 2016 election. Your job is to research the 6 environmental platforms that we on isidewith.com and state, without biases, where they stand.

Rubric Code: CX56WW5

By ktonkin

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Political Science

Type: Presentation

Grade Levels: 9-12

Category
	Poor Many items missing, not relevant, or not explained. 2 pts	Fair Some items are missing, not relevant, or not explained well. 4 pts	Good All items are present, relevant, and explained well. 6 pts	Excellent Items exceed expectations of presence, relevance and explanation. 8 pts
Platform 6 Environmetal Platforms	Poor More than two platform issues were not addressed, clearly defined, or were missing altogether.	Fair One or two platform issues were not addressed or clearly defined.	Good All 6 platform issues are explained in the powerpoint presentation. All requirements have been met.	Excellent All 6 Platform issues are explained thoroughly in a powerpoint presentation. All requirements have been met and exceeded.
Organization of Presentation	Poor There was no clear or logical organizational structure.	Fair Content is logically organized for the most part.	Good Uses headings or bulleted lists to organize, but the overall organization of topics appears flawed.	Excellent Content is well organized using headings or bulleted lists to group related material.
National Comparison	Poor No comparison is given.	Fair Comparison is lightly addressed with no facts/statistics to support the claim.	Good Comparison is discussed well but is missing facts or has incorrect facts.	Excellent Comparison is well discussed and has statistics to support where the candidate stands on the issue compared to the rest of the United States.
Iowa Comparison	Poor No comparison is given.	Fair Comparison is lightly addressed with no facts/statistics to support the claim.	Good Comparison is discussed well but is missing facts or has incorrect facts	Excellent Comparison is well discussed and has statistics to support where the candidate stands on the issue compared to the rest of Iowa.
Overall Project Presentation	Poor Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. but these often distract from the presentation content.	Fair Makes use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. but occasionally these detract from the presentation content.	Good Makes good use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance the presentation.	Excellent Makes excellent use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance the presentation.
Sources for Project Minimum of 3 sources required for Project	Poor Very little or no source information was collected.	Fair Source information collected for project, but not documented in desired format. Less than 3 sources.	Good Source information collected for project. Displays 3 sources. Most documented in desired format.	Excellent Source information collected for project. Displays at least 3 sources overall. All documented in desired format.
Workload Has this truly been a "group" project?	Poor The workload was not divided OR several people in the group are viewed as not doing their fair share of the work.	Fair The workload was divided, but one person in the group is viewed as not doing his/her fair share of the work.	Good The workload is divided and shared fairly by all team members, though workloads may vary from person to person.	Excellent The workload is divided and shared equally by all team members.

Keywords:

Presidential Candidate

Subjects:

Political Science

Types:

Presentation

Discuss this rubric