iRubric: 2nd term - particle tech - 2019-1 rubric

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

2nd term - particle tech - 2019-1

Final document - particle tech - final deliverable - 2018-2

Students must hand in a 2nd deliverable for a design project for particle technology engineering. this paper reports on the design of two operations in the production process of a staple product such as coffee, rice, soy, beans, etc. taken out from a general process block diagram

Rubric Code: JXC4C49

By tebbiechale

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Engineering

Type: Writing

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Project deliverable Particle technology and engineering
	Poor 1 pts	Fair 2.5 pts	Good 4 pts	Excellent 5 pts
Alternatives 25 % Students reviewed different equipments used in industry and discussed which alternatives to be considered, made an argumented selection based on requirements and restrictions	Poor Students failed to present a supported selection of the equipment for one or both stages	Fair Selection of equipment for one or both stages was poor, few alternatives were reviewed	Good Selection of equipments for both stages was explained and based on various alternatives and feasebility	Excellent Selection of equipment was given for both stages, the decision process was explained, logical based on comparison, contrasting as well as feasebility
Design component stage 1 15 % Student effectively presented a design of their own that will fulfill the intented purpose	Poor The design is very basic, reduced to few values given for number, dimensions, geometry and capacity without good logic, taken from literature	Fair The design parameters were taken from literature, some values were given for some of the following: number, dimensions, geometry and capacity remaining logical	Good Students effectively used information presented in literature to help in the design, demonstrating the use of their own criteria for decision making for some of the following: number, dimensions, geometry and capacity remaining logical	Excellent Students effectively used information presented in literature to support their design of the storage system, calculated number, dimensions, geometry and capacity logically
Design component stage 2 15 % Student effectively presented a design of their own that will fulfill the intented purpose	Poor The design is very basic, reduced to few values given for number, dimensions, geometry and capacity without good logic, taken from literature	Fair The design parameters were taken from literature, some values were given for some of the following: number, dimensions, geometry and capacity remaining logical	Good Students effectively used information presented in literature to help in the design, demonstrating the use of their own criteria for decision making for some of the following: number, dimensions, geometry and capacity remaining logical	Excellent Students effectively used information presented in literature to support their design of the storage system, calculated number, dimensions, geometry and capacity logically
Equipment 1diagram and mass balance 15 % Student effectively presented an equipment diagram of their own	Poor Equipment diagram or mass balance are incomplete	Fair Equipment diagram is incorrect, missing some minor items, mass balance is missing service streams where applicable, functioning is implied	Good Equipment diagram in mostly complete and logical, mass balance is mostly complete and logical, includes service streams where applicable, maybe some minor errors in logic here and there, functioning is explained	Excellent Equipment diagram and mass balance are complete and include service streams where applicable, values are coherent, and logical, functioning is explained
Equipment 2diagram and mass balance 15 % Student effectively presented an equipment diagram of their own	Poor Equipment diagram or mass balance are incomplete	Fair Equipment diagram is incorrect, missing some minor items, mass balance is missing service streams where applicable, functioning is implied	Good Equipment diagram in mostly complete and logical, mass balance is mostly complete and logical, includes service streams where applicable, maybe some minor errors in logic here and there, functioning is explained	Excellent Equipment diagram and mass balance are complete and include service streams where applicable, values are coherent, and logical, functioning is explained
Organization and Grammar, 5 % Students show good grammar and spelling and logical skills	Poor There are so many errors the meaning is obscured. the text is not organizaed. Student obviously did not proof read the paper at all.	Fair Paper has many distracting errors. there are sections not organized logically. Perhaps some editing did occur.	Good There are occasional errors, but they are not too distracting and do not obscure the meaning of the sentence. document is organized enough to allow a general idea of the authors	Excellent Writing is free or almost free of errors. text is logically organized, the reader can follow trough without going back and forth
Use of References 10 % Students show respect for authorship	Poor Student failed to cite sources. Very few references given throughout paper, even though the content clearly did not originate from the student.	Fair Although attributions are occasionally given, many statements seem unsubstantiated. Sources of information are unclear.	Good Professionally legitimate sources are generally present and attribution is, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. Student made a good effort at citing sources.	Excellent Compelling evidence from legitimate sources are given. Attribution is clear and fairly represented.

Keywords:

technical writing, literature review, science, engineering

Subjects:

Engineering

Types:

Writing

Discuss this rubric