Skip to main content

iRubric: CAD Drawing rubric

find rubric

(draft) edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
CAD Drawing 
CAD Drawing
CAD Drawing
Rubric Code: UX8CX3A
By engineer_smith
Draft
Public Rubric
Subject: Engineering  
Type: Assignment  
Grade Levels: 9-12, Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric CAD Drawing
  very poor

1 pts

poor

2 pts

good

3 pts

excelent

4 pts

Title block

very poor

PCT Title block was not used.
poor

title block was used but information was missing
good

title block was used, all information was there but not in correct location.
excelent

PCT Title block was used and all information was correct and current.
Dimensions Lines

very poor

Did not use or missed more than 3 dimensions.
More than
Extension lines were hard to follow missing or not uniform<BR>
Text was not uniform and format was not to the correct decimal point.
poor

Drawing is missing 3-4 dimensions. 3-4 errors with dimension lines. More then 2 errors with dimensions. more then 2 errors with dimension placement
good

Drawing is missing 1 or 2 dimensions. 1 or 2 errors with dimension lines. 1 or 2 errors with dimensions. 1 or 2 errors with dimension placement
excelent

Drawing has all dimensions of product.<BR>
All dimensions were accurately marked.<BR>
Dimensions were correct and easily identified.<BR>
Extension lines were even and clearly marked beginning and end of intended piece.<BR>
Dimensions were in correct format and uniform text.
Neatness and Accuracy

very poor

Text is of various sizes and some is hard to read and identify.

Student paid no attention to details
Workmanship and quality was of low standard.<BR>
poor

Text is of various sizes but can be read and identified.
Product was not easily deciphered and not easily recognized.
Student did not pay attention to detail more then 3 details missing or incorrect
Workmanship and quality was of moderate standard
good

text is uniform and easily identifiable. eraser marks still visible, erased lines still visible. Student paid attention to details but upto 3 details missing.
Workmanship and quality was of an acceptable standard.
excelent

Text is uniform and easily identifiable.
No eraser marks or lines still visabe
Student paid attention to detail.
Workmanship and quality was of a high standard.
Views

very poor

Front, side and top views were not used.<BR>
Some information was missing.<BR>
Notes were not used, information was not complete to explain portions of the drawing.
poor

Front, side and top views were used and recognizable.<BR>
Some information was included and identifiable.<BR>
Notes were used but information was not complete to explain portions of the drawing.
good
excelent

Front, side and top views were used and recognizable.<BR>
All information was included and easily identified.<BR>
Notes were used if further information was needed to explain portions of the drawing.
On Time

very poor

This person did not turn assignment in on time. Was at least 2 weeks late.
poor

This person turned in assignment late, but within two weeks and was actively working on it to ensure a higher quality product.
good
excelent

This person turned the assignment in on time and with attention to detail and quality craftsmanship.




Subjects:


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
This rubric is still in draft mode and cannot be scored. Please change the rubric status to ready to use.
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.

n224