iRubric: Product Design rubric

Student attends strongly to aesthetic or visual qualities. Work shows much consideration for design and detail. The work is overall very visually pleasing.

Work proves student used a good amount of consideration to aesthetics and visual qualities. Some technical aspects are handled well or some ideas are handled well, but the two don't always mesh and work together. The sense of technical competence is emerging but it does not display mastery.

Student attempts to add or consider some aesthetics or visual qualities but does not follow through with this concentration throughout the product.

Aesthetic and visual qualities are weak and do not seem well planned.

Aesthetic and visual qualities are poor, or doesn't appear to have been considered. Work shows a lack of awareness of tools/media.

Work shows strong craftsmanship qualities.
The product was constructed successfully and made it through all Cone and Glaze fires without breaking.

Work shows sense of real effort. In general, the work demonstrates some degree of success. The product was constructed well but may have had a small piece fall off during firing. If their product fell apart in the first firing, the student worked hard to produce a better product.

Technique is erratic, with little or no sense of challenge. Work may show a sense of real effort, but problems are not successfully resolved. If their product fell apart, student produced another product but not to the standards of the project. Student could have spent more time constructing a better product.

Solutions to problems tend to be more simplistic. Attempts to deal with ideas or technical problems are not realized. The same building issue continues to happen. Student is unable to finish or does not complete a product equal to the project standards.

Technique is poor. Solutions tend to be redundant and student is unable to successfully build a product.

Body language, voice projection, and sales pitch were strong. Customer and audience were influenced to purchase the product.

Body language, voice projection, and sales pitch were good. Customer and audience were influenced to purchase the product but may have seemed uninterested one or twice.

Body language, voice projection, and sales pitch were average. Customer and audience were barely influenced to purchase the product.

Body language, voice projection, and sales pitch were weak for the majority of the presentation. Customer and audience were not influenced to purchase the product.

Body language, voice projection, and sales pitch were poor. Customer and audience were not influenced to purchase the product at all.