Skip to main content
iRubric: Principles of Engineering Final Project rubric

iRubric: Principles of Engineering Final Project rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Principles of Engineering Final Project 
Field of Engineering PowerPoint Presentation Science Rubric
Students will design and create a website that will present the engineering design process that they employed while designing the La Salle Robotics Team a robot transportation cart.
Rubric Code: MXA645X
By RyanPMcDowell
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Engineering  
Type: Presentation  
Grade Levels: 9-12

Powered by iRubric Presentation Rubric
  Not Attempted

0 pts

Attempted

1 pts

Limited

2 pts

Proficient

3 pts

Distinguished

4 pts

Score

(N/A)

The Design Process
50 pts

Not Attempted

The topic is minimally covered with few to no details or no presentation.
Attempted

Content is typically confusing and may contain little to no explanation of the design process.
Limited

The content is generally accuarate, but a few parts are clearly inaccurate or the group is not in consensus.

Most of the engineering design process is outlined.
Proficient

Most of the content is accurate. One section may be incorrect. All of the design process was explained, but the explanation lacked crystal clear detail.
Distinguished

The design process is completely explained from start to finish. A clear understanding of the problem presented, the solutions evaluated, and any changes made along the way are clearly outlined. Attention to detail is evident.
Score
Website
10 pts

Not Attempted

No website.
Attempted

Website appears to be a template, with little to no adjustments. Three or less of the proficient criteria are met.
Limited

Website includes some of the items in the proficient criteria.
Proficient

Website includes the following:
- Appropriate team name
- Group members' names
- Explanation of the challenge
- Budget
- 4 views (front, top, side, iso) of prototype
- 4 views (front, top, side, iso) of the CAD
- Risk assessment
Distinguished

Website appears to be a viable engineering company with attention to focusing on the specific consumer. Website includes:
- Appropriate team name
- Group members' names
- Explanation of the challenge
- Budget
- 4 views (front, top, side, iso) of prototype
- 4 views (front, top, side, iso) of the CAD
- Risk assessment
Score
Proposal
10 pts

Not Attempted

Proposal is lacking a fair amount of the items listed in proficient criteria. Grammatical errors are numerous. No adjustments are made from the rough draft.
Attempted

Proposal is lacking some of the items listed in proficicient criteria. Some grammatical errors apparent. Limited adjustments made to rough draft.
Limited

Proposal has 3 or more grammatical errors. One of the criteria listed under proficient is missing. One adjustment was not made from the rough draft.
Proficient

One or two grammatical errors are present. Proposal includes:
- Title
- Participants
- Intro to the project
- Timeline
- Design process
- Materials and budget
- Ethical guidelines and Risk Assessment
- 4 views (front, top, side, iso) of CAD
- MLA formated citations
Distinguished

No grammatical errors are present and all formatting is consistent with the proposal directions.
Proposal includes:
- Title
- Participants
- Intro to the project
- Timeline
- Design process
- Materials and budget
- Ethical guidelines and Risk Assessment
- 4 views (front, top, side, iso) of CAD
- MLA formated citations
Score
CAD
10 pts

Not Attempted

Not produced.
Attempted

One or more of the views are missing. Limited dimensions included. No attempt made to include fasteners.
Limited

All 4 views are included. 3 or more dimensions are absent. Limited attempt was made at including fasteners.
Proficient

All 4 views are included.
One or two dimensions are misssing. An obvious attempt at including fasteners is present, but some are missing.
Distinguished

Near professional quality.
All 4 views (front, top, side, iso) are present. All dimensions included. Most fasteners have been planned out.
Score
Presentation
10 pts

Not Attempted

Presentation was less than 1 minute long.
Attempted

Presentation was 1-2 minutes long.
Limited

Presentation was 2-4 minutes long.
Proficient

Presentation was 4-5 minutes long.
Distinguished

Presentation was at least 5 minutes long.
Score
Engineering Journal
10 pts

Not Attempted

No journal received.
Attempted

Minimal effort was made to keep track of decissions made by the group
Limited

Limited effort was made to document the decissions made by the group
Proficient

A clear effort was made to document the design process from each member's perspective (focus on latter part of journal entries)
Distinguished

The design process can be followed solely using the engineering design journal with nearly no input from the group members.
Score



Keywords:
  • engineering / STEM / presentation / Design



Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

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

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

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

Publish

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

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n98