iRubric: Animal Nonverbal Behavior-COM Observation & Analysis Rubric

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

Animal Nonverbal Behavior-COM Observation & Analysis Rubric

This rubric provides criteria and standards for an report of observations and analysis of intraspecies animal interaction.

Rubric Code: DX73W76

By skgroupdoctor

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Communication

Type: Project

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Observe & Analyze Animal NVB-NVC
	Outstanding 4 pts	Proficient 3 pts	Rudimentary 2 pts	Needs Improvement or Missing 1 pts
Formatting	Outstanding Formatting follows required guidelines, including title, student name, subheads (e.g., Intro/Purpose, Setting Description, Log of Observations, Analysis of Animal NVB-NVC, Conclusion, and References). Entire report transitions smoothly between sections; is aesthetically pleasing.	Proficient Meets most of assignment requirements for 4. Minor formatting errors, with some awkward transitions or changes in writing style.	Rudimentary Multiple formatting errors, voice or style. Sections do not function as a cohesive report.	Needs Improvement or Missing Limited or no attempt made to follow formatting guidelines. Log, analysis, or sections are missing. Purpose of assignment is missed.
Consistency/Voice/Style	Outstanding Voice is consistent and professional throughout, using a third person point of view. Uses varied sentence structure, college-level/scholarly terminology related to animal NVB-NVC. Provides clear, concise and precise wording that makes use of good transitions between paragraphs and sections. Uses the same font and point size throughout.	Proficient Voice is consistent and professional throughout, using a third person point of view. Uses varied sentence structure and mostly college-level/scholarly terminology related to animal NVB-NVC. Provides mostly clear, concise and precise wording that makes use of good transitions between paragraphs and sections. Uses same font and point size throughout.	Rudimentary Voice is consistent but may be unprofessional throughout; sometimes shifts point of view, uses 2nd or 1st person rather than a third person point of view. Uses varied sentence structure and some college-level/scholarly terminology related to animal NVB-NVC. Provides clear, concise and precise wording that makes use of good transitions between paragraphs and sections. Uses same font and point size throughout. Some sections seem pieced together or illogical.	Needs Improvement or Missing Written in sloppy and unprofessional style. Uses colloquial vocabulary, with no or limited scholarly terminology related to animal NVB-NVC. Over uses basic sentence structure without variety, or has multiple usage errors (run-on sentences or fragments; grammatical errors). Different fonts. No attempt to provide a consistent voice. Some sections seem pieced together or illogical.
Concept/Design	Outstanding Design of observation is well-defined. Methods and procedures are sound;	Proficient Design of experiment, observation, or social media challenges is well-defined, grounded in scholarly research. Methods and procedures are mostly sound and likely to yield good results. Variables are limited and trials are at least 10.	Rudimentary Design of experiment, observation, or social media challenges is well-defined, grounded in some scholarly research. Methods and procedures are mostly sound and likely to yield good results. Variables are somewhat limited and trials are at least 8.	Needs Improvement or Missing Design of experiment, observation, or social media challenges is not well-defined, grounded in some scholarly research. Methods and procedures are sound and likely to yield good results. Too many variables and trials are less than eight.
Introduction/Purpose	Outstanding Intro and purpose of the experiment is explained in terms of what the researchers hope to achieve and why and is based on scholarly research that is noted. Should be two paragraphs.	Proficient Intro and purpose of the experiment is explained in terms of what the researchers hope to achieve and why and is based on some scholarly research that is noted. Is at least one paragraph or more.	Rudimentary Intro and purpose are mostly explained with some research and tells us what the researchers hope to achieve but the why is missing.	Needs Improvement or Missing Missing or too brief.
Hypothesis	Outstanding Provides a clear explanation of what they thought would happen and most importantly why. Should be detailed.	Proficient Provides a clear explanation of what they thought would happen and most importantly why. Provides some details.	Rudimentary Provides a clear explanation of what they thought would happen but misses the why. Is somewhat detailed.	Needs Improvement or Missing Missing, too brief, does not include the why.
Raw Data	Outstanding Data is represented in a clear, easy to understand way, making use of aesthetically pleasing charts and/or graphical representations. Students have teased out demographic information as well as presented both quantitative and qualitative data.	Proficient Data is represented in a clear, easy to understand way, making use of aesthetically pleasing charts and/or graphical representations. Students have teased out most demographic information as well as presented both quantitative and qualitative data.	Rudimentary Data is represented in a mostly clear, easy to understand why, making use of aesthetically pleasing charts and/or graphical representations. Students have teased out most demographic information as well as presented both quantitative and qualitative data. Some parts seem missing or not represented.	Needs Improvement or Missing Missing data, not aesthetically pleasing, confusing, or insufficient.
Discussion	Outstanding Is at least two pages and compares the hypothesis with the results, discusses any differences and backs up claims with scholarly research.	Proficient Is at least two pages in length, compares hypothesis with results and backs up claims with some scholarly research, though not enough.	Rudimentary Is less than 2 pages in length, compares hypothesis with results, does not use enough scholarly sources.	Needs Improvement or Missing Less than one page, compares hypothesis with results but does not have sufficient research
References	Outstanding At least five scholarly sources included, frequently and effectively used throughout the paper to support the hypothesis and the conclusions.	Proficient Fewer than five scholarly sources cited. Sources somewhat effectively used to support the hypothesis and the conclusions of the report.	Rudimentary Sources cited, but few are scholarly. They are infrequently or ineffectively used in the report.	Needs Improvement or Missing Few or no scholarly sources, with no effort made to integrate them into the hypothesis or the conclusion of the report.
Grammar/Spelling	Outstanding No grammar or spelling errors exist.	Proficient Minor errors in grammar or spelling.	Rudimentary Grammar or spelling errors are frequent enough to distract the reader and detract from the purpose of the report.	Needs Improvement or Missing Numerous errors with no effort made to proofread.

Keywords:

Nonverbal Communication, Nonverbal, Animal, Behavior, Observation, Elthnography

Subjects:

Types:

Project

Discuss this rubric