Skip to main content
iRubric: Mini Simulated Workplace Program rubric

iRubric: Mini Simulated Workplace Program rubric

find rubric

(draft) edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Mini Simulated Workplace Program 
Rubric Code: V23X45B
By kmilliken
Draft
Public Rubric
Subject: Computers  
Type: Project  
Grade Levels: 9-12

Powered by iRubric
  No Evidence

0 pts

Convincing Evidence

1 pts

Outstanding Evidence

2 pts


Awarded Points - Enter point value in this column (0-2)

(N/A)

Foods Team

Were you able to discern who represented the Food Team?
No Evidence

Food Team was not identified.
Convincing Evidence

Names of students of the Food Team were shared.
Outstanding Evidence

Names and jobs of the Food Team were shared (i.e. an organizational chart).
N/A
Computer Science Team

Were you able to discern who represented the Computer Science Team?
No Evidence

Computer Science Team was not identified.
Convincing Evidence

Names of students of the Computer Science Team were shared.
Outstanding Evidence

Names and jobs of the Computer Science Team were shared (i.e. an organizational chart).
N/A
Computer Science Team Name

Was the name of the Computer Science Team shared? The scenario is the students are working for their own consulting firm.
No Evidence

The name of the Computer Science Team was not shared.
Convincing Evidence

The name of the Computer Science Team was shared.
Outstanding Evidence

The name of the Computer Science Team was shared along with their mission statement.
N/A
Application name

Was the name of the Application shared?
No Evidence

The name of the application was not shared.
Convincing Evidence

The name of the application was shared and it was the same name as the Computer Science Team name.
Outstanding Evidence

The application name was shared and is unique to a Foods / Nutrition / Wellness.
N/A
Application Idea

Did they share how the Food Team came up with the idea for their application?
No Evidence

How the idea for the application was not shared.
Convincing Evidence

How the idea for the application was shared (many ideas were generated, but one person chose with their being a decision process).
Outstanding Evidence

How the idea for application was shared and how they decided on the idea was shared (for example, many ideas were generated and then they voted on the ideas).
N/A
Application purpose

Did the students share the purpose of the application they created?
No Evidence

The students did not share the purpose of their application.
Convincing Evidence

Students shared the purpose of their application.
Outstanding Evidence

Students shared the purpose of their application AND why their application has an important purpose.
N/A
Program execution

Does the program execute? Did you see the program run?
No Evidence

Program was not demonstrated.
Convincing Evidence

Program was demonstrated, but did not work properly.
Outstanding Evidence

Program was demonstrated without any obvious problems/errors.
N/A
Correct input

Does the program allow users to input information/data?
No Evidence

The user was not able to input any information.
Convincing Evidence

User input was available, but very limited (1-2) inputs from users.
Outstanding Evidence

User was input was very interactive; lots of input/choices for users.
N/A
Correct output

Does the program have meaningful output based on the user input?
No Evidence

The program did not generate any output.
Convincing Evidence

Output was generated, but did not relate to the purpose of the application.
Outstanding Evidence

Output was generated and related to the overall purpose of the application.
N/A
Development choice

Was the tool that Computer Science Team chose for developing their application shared? (i.e. code.org, java, etc.)
No Evidence

Development tool was not shared.
Convincing Evidence

Development tool name was shared.
Outstanding Evidence

The team has not only told you what tool they chose, but why they chose their specific development tool.
N/A
Meetings

Did they share what did their meetings look like when they met in the library? What responsibilities did everyone have?
No Evidence

Meeting information was not shared.
Convincing Evidence

Meeting information was shared, without responsibilities.
Outstanding Evidence

Meeting information was shared with responsibilities (i.e. they provided a sample agenda).
N/A
Problems/Challenges - Foods

Did they share what problems/challenges were encountered from the Food Team's perspective?
No Evidence

Problems / Challenges were not shared.
Convincing Evidence

Problems / Challenges were acknowledged, but not identified. For example, they may say "there were no problems / challenges".
Outstanding Evidence

Problems / Challenges were acknowledged and identified.
N/A
Problems - Computer Science

Did they share what problems/challenges were encountered from the Computer Science Team's perspective?
No Evidence

Problems / Challenges were not shared.
Convincing Evidence

Problems / Challenges were acknowledged, but not identified. For example, they may say "there were no problems / challenges".
Outstanding Evidence

Problems / Challenges were acknowledged and identified.
N/A
Presentation

Did BOTH teams participate in the presentation?
No Evidence

Only one person from one team (Foods or Computer Science) presented (talked).
Convincing Evidence

Only one person from each team (Foods & Computer Science) presented (talked).
Outstanding Evidence

More than one person presented (talked) from each team (Foods & Computer Science).
N/A
Presentation Time

Was the team able to stick to the 10-12 minute presentation time?
No Evidence

Presentation was very short (under 8 minutes).
Convincing Evidence

Presentation time was 10 minutes - no questions from the judges.
Outstanding Evidence

Presentation time was 10 minutes - questions were addressed.
N/A
Prepared

Were both teams prepared to present today?
No Evidence

Teams were not professionally dressed and not prepared to present.
Convincing Evidence

Teams were professionally dressed and prepared to present.
Outstanding Evidence

Teams were professionally dressed, prepared to present and were knowledgeable.
N/A




Subjects:

Types:

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.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n16