iRubric: Identity: Who Am I? What Am rubric

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

Identity: Who Am I? What Am

Identity: Who Am I? What Am?

For use by the ESL/LEP student

Rubric Code: PA3BC

By charliepitrolo

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: (General)

Type: Presentation

Grade Levels: 6-8, 9-12, Undergraduate

Reading/Writing Process Creation of story board/outline & script to facilitate sequencing and fluid voice narration.
	Poor 0 pts	Fair 2 pts	Good 4 pts	Excellent 6 pts
Sequencing Prepared before creating multimedia product.	Poor Not performed.	Fair Partially performed using index cards, Post-it notes, etc.	Good Sufficiently performed using index cards, Post-it notes, etc.	Excellent Sufficiently performed in digital format (i.e. PPT, Inspiration, Word, StoryBoard Pro)
Scripting Rough/final draft	Poor A rough draft was not created.	Fair A rough draft was created, but not revised.	Good A rough draft was created and revised.	Excellent Rough draft created & revised using a voice recorder.
Multimedia Product
Elements Of the elements contributing to one's identity, the presentation included	Poor fewer than 2 elements.	Fair 3-4 elements.	Good 5-6 elements.	Excellent more than 6 elements.
Organization Elements of identity were presented	Poor with no semblance of order or organization.	Fair in a grouped or a chronological manner.	Good in a grouped and chronological manner.	Excellent in a grouped & chronological manner, & that alludes to the future.
Visuals Presentation included visuals	Poor fewer than 2 visuals	Fair 2-3 visuals	Good 4-5 visuals	Excellent 6 or more visuals were incorporated. At least one of which was non-static.
Audio Types Incorporation of narrative	Poor No narrative types were incorporated.	Fair Use of "live" vocal narrative	Good Recorded (non-digital) narrative was used.	Excellent Digitally recorded narrative was used.
Audio Characteristics Fidelity and relevancy to presentation	Poor Pervasive distortion and/or severe lack of fluency. No eye contact w/audience. Enunciation detracted from project.	Fair Pervasive reliance upon notes. Little eye contact with audience. Narration had no relevancy to project. Noticeable issues w/enunciation.	Good Minor reliance upon notes. Some eye contact with audience. Narration provided positive effect. Minor enunciation flaws.	Excellent Narrative presented from memory w/out use of notes. Constant eye contact. Narration correlates to presentation. Negligible enunciation flaws.