iRubric: Biotechnology Newsletter Grading Rubric

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

Biotechnology Newsletter Grading Rubric

This rubric outlines the grading scheme for a high school biology-level newsletter written about a particular biotechnology issue.

Rubric Code: H9AA3C

By bartman969

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Science

Type: Writing

Grade Levels: 9-12

Science Writing Rubric
	Poor 1 pts	Fair 2 pts	Good 3 pts
Organization	Poor Writing is not clearly organized. Paragraphs/columns may have multiple topics making it unclear. Few transitions from one paragraph to another. Topic sentences are not clearly stated and writing tends to stray off topic.	Fair Writing may be clearly organized according to outline of assignment. Paragraphs mostly remain on one topic with some straying from the topic. Mostly clear transitions from one paragraph to another. Topic sentences are generally clear and concise with few errors.	Good Writing is clearly organized in proper order as listed on assignment. Paragraphs/columns remain on one topic. Clear transitions from one paragraph to another. Topic sentences are clear and concise.
Scientific Content	Poor The article presents few facts and more opinions. It fails to present an educational background of the techniques involved in the technology. It contains irrelevant details and is written in a narrative style. Headline/title is missing or inaccurate. Little or no attempts made to follow news article format or sequencing of information. There are numerous errors in grammar, punctuation, or spelling that make it difficult	Fair Presents a moderately effective introduction to the basic techniques of the technology. Most details are relevant, and the tone varies between narrative and journalistic. Reader mostly understands how the technique is performed, may have a few questions. Attempts were made to present the information in a way that defines terms necessary.	Good The newsletter presents factual information, and incorporates relevant information to support reader understanding of the physical science of the technique. Reader understands how the technique is accomplished. All relevant terms are defined.
Mechanics (Grammar, spelling, etc.)	Poor Writing contains poor grammar which interferes with meaning. Writing lacks control of usage. The page is less than 1 page in length.	Fair Some grammar mistakes but it does not interfere with meaning. Some mechanical errors but does not interfere with meaning. The newsletter is less than double sided in length.The headline/title is not written effectively.	Good Writing style is clear, using journalistic language. Grammar has very few mistakes which do not interfere with meaning. Mechanical errors are few and far between. No constant pattern of errors. The newsletter is double-sided. Headline/title is written effectively.
References/Sources	Poor Less than two sources are cited in parenthetical style throughout text, or none in parenthetical style, or not properly cited in MLA at end of newsletter.	Fair Between 2-4 sources are cited in parenthetical style throughout the text, as well as cited in MLA format at the end.	Good At least 4 sources are cited in parenthetical style throughout the text, as well as in MLA format at the end of the newsletter.
Pros & Cons	Poor Advantages/Potential advantages, Negative Consequences/Potential Negative Consequences are not explained in a meaningful way. Reader has little or no understanding of why technology can benefit human beings, animals, or the planet, as well as why it could potentially harm or cause unforeseen negative impacts on nature, etc.	Fair Advantages/Potential advantages, Negative Consequences/Potential Negative Consequences included. Reader has a vague understanding of why technology can benefit human beings, animals, or the planet, as well as why it could potentially harm or cause unforeseen negative impacts on nature, etc.	Good Advantages/Potential advantages, Negative Consequences/Potential Negative Consequences written in insightful, informative quality. Reader understands why technology can benefit human beings, animals, or the planet, as well as why it could potentially harm or cause unforeseen negative impacts on nature, etc.
Graphics	Poor Graphics missing or irrelevant or not captioned in meaningful way or loosely relevant or low quality resolution.	Fair Graphics (1-2) are of acceptable quality and are loosely meaningful to newsletter topic. Captions do not fully explain meaning/relevance and/or origin of images.	Good Graphics (at least 2) included are good-quality resolution, meaningful and/or relevant to newsletter topic content. Captions explain origin and meaning of image.
Opinion & Commentary	Poor One or more aspects missing from this requirement.	Fair Personal impressions and opinions are expressed. Opinions may or may not be supported by meaningful argument(s). Best application(s) mentioned, or omitted. Limits/regulations may be mentioned without persuasive meaning/tone. Reader may not be fully aware of suggested applications, limits, etc.	Good Personal impressions and opinions expressed. Personal opinions supported by argument(s). Best applications of this technology are identified. Limits/regulations are mentioned in a thoughtful, persuasive way. Reader is fully aware of author's opinion, suggestions and cautions.

Subjects:

Science

Types:

Writing

Discuss this rubric