Skip to main content
  • help_outline help
iRubric: Robotic Engineering rubric

iRubric: Robotic Engineering rubric

 
find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   apply to...   delete   Do more...
Robotic Engineering 
This rubric is designed to assess the design of the team's robot.
Rubric Code: G333W4
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Science  
Type: Project  
Grade Levels: (none)


Powered by iRubric Robot Design Rubric
  Needs Improvement

1 pts

Fair

2 pts

Good

3 pts

Excellent

4 pts

Innovative Design
5 %

Needs Improvement

Design, drive train, and structure are standard.

Manipulators/sensors used in expected ways, if used.

Strategy for combining missions expected.

Programming written as expected.
Fair

Design creative, unique use of drive train or structure.

Manipulators/sensors used in unexpected ways, if used.

Unique/creative strategy for coordinating missions.

Programming tasks used in unexpected ways.

(For this category, 1 of the 4 above is demonstrated)
Good

Design creative, uique use of drive train or structure.

Manipulators/sensors used in unexpected ways, if used.

Unique/creative strategy for coodinating missions.

Programming tasks used in unexpected ways.

(For this category, 2 of the 4 above are demonstrated)
Excellent

Design creative, unique use of drive train or structure.

Manipulators/sensors used in unexpected ways, if used.

Unique/creative strategy for coodinating missions.

Programming tasks used in unexpected ways.

(For this category, 1 done exceptionally or 3 of the 4 above demonstrated.)
Strategy, Process, Problem-Solving
5 %

Needs Improvement

Uses standard design.

No design process (from initial concept through build, test, refinement) communicated.

Strategy based only on ease of task - did not maximize time, combine mission tasks or consider points.
Fair

Some forethought in initial design.

Refinement of robot and programs not communicated.

Strategy often based on ease of task -few risks taken.

Some consideration of time, mission combinations or maximizing points.
Good

Basic understanding of design process, evidence of conceptual planning, building, testing, refining of robot, manipulators, programs.

Effective strategic planning, combining mission tasks, plotting routes, using manipulators and/or program slots.
Excellent

Communicates complete design process, from initial concept through build, test, and refinement.

Excellent/innovative strategy, combining mission tasks, plotting routes, maximizing points.
Locomotion & Navigation
5 %

Needs Improvement

Difficulty going same distance on repeated missions.

Too fast for accuracy, or too slow to accomplish mission.

Turns inaccurate or inconsistent.

Moves between tow points inconsistently.

No effort to know position on table beyond distance and accurate turns.
Fair

Goes defined distances sometimes.

Turns sometimes accurate.

Sometimes moves between tow points consistently.

Little or no effort to know position on table beyond distance and accurate turns.
Good

Goes defined distances most of the time.

Not too fast for accuracy or too slow to accomplish mission.

Turns reasonabley accurate and consistent.

Allows for variables.

Moves between two points with reasonable accuracy and consistency.

May use various sensors.
Excellent

Goes defined distances efficiently.

Adjusts speed, position sensing for optimum speed and accuracy.

Turns accurately and consistently.

Allows for variables (battery wear, obstacles).

Moves between tow points with very good accuracy and consistency.

May use various sensors.
Programming
15 %

Needs Improvement

Programs disorganized

Programs inefficient

Results unpredictable

Sensors inadequately used.

Programs do not accomplish expected tasks.

Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions defined but unused.

Student can't describe what run will do.
Fair

Programs somewhat organized

Programs efficient at completing some tasks.

Results somewhat unpredictable

Programs do some of what is expected

Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions, if used, not understood.
Good

Programs organized.

Programs efficient at completing most tasks.

Programs do what they're expected to do.

Sensors used effectively, if used.

Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions, if used, are needed.

Kids can describe most of mission.
Excellent

Programs logically organized.

Programs very efficient.

Programs always work, even for complex tasks.

Sensors, if used, guarantee certain actions in every trial.

Programs work in competition as in practice.

Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions, if used, are effective.

Children can describe mission and reference the program.
Student Does the Work
5 %

Needs Improvement

Little knowledge of why some parts are located as they are on the robot.

Little or no understanding of what pieces did.

Building/programming appears primarily done by coach.
Fair

Knowledge of robot structure and programming shows minimal understanding of underlying design, science, and technology (age specific expectations).

Building and programming seems primarily directed by coach.
Good

Knowledge of robot structure and programming shows moderate understanding of underlying desing, science, and technology (ae specific expectations).

Building/programming mostly directed by team members, with help from coach.
Excellent

Knowledge of robot structure and programming shows thorough understanding of underlying design, science, and technology (age specific expectations).

Building/programming was done by team memebers.
Structural
5 %

Needs Improvement

Difficulty with robot assembly during demo.

Base weak, falls apart when handled or run.

Attachments, if used, weak and fall apart often; difficulty completing task; or overly complex. Robot design from book, little modification by team.
Fair

Robot assembly done with few errors.

Robot base structure has some stabliity.

Attachments, if used, difficult to apply; and /or not modular; not precise or not repeatable.

Robot show signs of team's design ideas.
Good

Slow robot assembly, with no errors

Robot base stable, but not robust.

Attachments, if used, modular; function most of the time; and/or take some time to assemble; somewhat precese and /or repeatable.

Robot designed by team.
Excellent

Robot assembles easily.

Robot base stable and robust.

Attachments, if used, modular, function as expected and easily added/removed from robot. Robot displays wide range of capabilities.

Attachments, if used, performtasks extremely well and are repeatable.

Robot designed by team; design is unique and creative.
Overall Design
10 %

Needs Improvement

Robots lack most critical design components: works, stays together, efficient parts use, attachments easy to add/remove, simpler than comparable robots.

Few components work together; few components look like they belong together.
Fair

Robot lacks many critical design components: works, stays together, efficient parts use, attachments easy to add/remove, simpler than comparable robots.

Some components work together; some components look like they belong together.
Good

Robot lacks some critical design components: works, stays together, efficient parts use attachments easy to add/remove, simpler than comparable robots.

Most components work together; most compenents look like they belong together.
Excellent

Robot is elegant, complete system.

All components work well together.

All components look like they belong together.
Troubleshooting.
15 %

Needs Improvement

None
Fair

Recognizes, attempts with little or no success.
Good

Can perform troubleshooting most of the time. Moderate success getting robot to achieve attempted objectives.
Excellent

Always performs troubleshooting without being asked. Works on robotic design, programming and features until objectives are achieved.
Special Events
10 %

Needs Improvement

None or very little.
Fair

Is aware of events; attends some, but very few. Little or no participation when attending.
Good

Attends moderate amount of special events.Usually asked to attend. Some participation; fair showing when competing.
Excellent

Seeks opportunities. Not only attends, but participates. Excells in competitive events.
Leadership
15 %

Needs Improvement

None; detracts from unity and excellence.
Fair

Very little. Is cooperative and offers some ideas in group settings.
Good

Can be a good leader. Is cooperative and occasionally helps others in group setting.
Excellent

Excellent leader. Clearly leads team and in group settings with all aspects of robot construction, programming and achievement of objectives. Neutralizes disagreements and compromises when appropriate.
Resources
10 %

Needs Improvement

Fair

Usually reads and uses general and basic resources available.
Good

Reads and uses general resources. Will seek outside resources and information when prompted or provided.
Excellent

Almost always seeks outside resources. Books, internet sites/searches, other software are consulted frequently.



Keywords:
  • Robot Design

Subjects:

Types:





Do more with this rubric:

Preview

Preview this rubric.

Edit

Modify this rubric.

Copy

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


Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

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

Publish

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

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2020 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n109