iRubric: Year 7 Earthquake/Volcano/Tsunami Case Study rubric

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

Year 7 Earthquake/Volcano/Tsunami Case Study

Year 5 Earthquake/Volcano/Tsunami Case Study

Students need to investigate a geological natural disaster and carry out a case study of that natural disaster. Choose a Earthquake, Volcano or Tsunami that has caused considerable damage to a civilisation in the past or more recently. A list has been provided for you but disasters not on the list can be chosen.

Rubric Code: WXX4843

By marerhre

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Geography

Type: Project

Grade Levels: 9-12

Natural Disaster
	Not completed or incorrect 0 pts	Poor 1 pts	Fair 2 pts	Good 3 pts
Explanation about the disaster	Not completed or incorrect Question has not been answered or the response is too brief to adequately answer the question.<BR> If the information has been plagiserised, you may have also received a 0	Poor Provided little to no visual aids and the explanation is brief. Your explanation does not clearly and/or provide enough detail as to why the disaster happens or occurs	Fair Explanation provides us with some understanding as to the workings of your natural disaster; however more information would have been beneficial. The pictures needed to beeter support the written information.	Good Your response adequately explains your natural disaster and the diagrams have been well chosen. The support the written information.
Map- of where the disaster occurs	Not completed or incorrect No map has been provided.	Poor Map is not clear	Fair Map is satisfactory, the key feature can be identified	Good Map has been well drawn, with the key features clearly identified.
Annotated map, with 5 examples	Not completed or incorrect Annotated map has not been completed.	Poor Map is not correctly annotated	Fair Annotations needed more information.	Good Annotations are concise but contain the required information-date, number of casualties and location.
Case study- not more than 50 years	Not completed or incorrect Case study has not been included	Poor Only provided a title.	Fair Have not provided all three areas- date, place and for how long.	Good Provided a concise profile of the case study- date, where and how long.
Images of the disaster	Not completed or incorrect No images have been provided.	Poor Only one image has been provided or the images are the same type.	Fair Provided 2 images, either a satellite, aerial or map. They have not correctly been sourced	Good Two images have been chosen, satellite,aerial or map and they clearly provide a picture of what happened.
Iimpacts the disaster caused	Not completed or incorrect No mention of the impacts.	Poor indicates more thorough research was needed. It lacks detail about the impacts your disaster had on the environment and humans.	Fair demonstrates research but more impacts could have been listed.	Good very clearly outlines the damage the disaster caused on the people and the environment.
Disaster- reduce the impact	Not completed or incorrect Question has not been completed or it has been plagiarized.	Poor Too brief and only provides a small example of how the impact could be reduced.	Fair Response shows a variety of research has occured by providing examples of prevention measures and ways people can reduce impact during the disaster.	Good Demonstrates very good research and provides a substantial list of prevention measures and reducing risks during the disaster. Pictures and diagrams may have also been included.
Who responded to the disaster.	Not completed or incorrect Question has not been completed or has been plagiarized.	Poor Response to the question does not cover all who assisted in the clean up.	Fair Provided a range of people/ organisations/ governments who assisted.	Good The response demostrates a variety of sources have been used as the list is comprehensive, looking at different scales, local, national and global.
Bibliography	Not completed or incorrect No list of resources used through the research task has been included	Poor Less three resources have been provided.	Fair Provided a list of resources but have not listed them correctly.	Good Provided a good range of resources and they have been listed correctly.
Presentation, grammar and spelling.	Not completed or incorrect Not clearly set out and has not been proofread. Geographic techniques have not been observed.	Poor Not all geographic techniques have been observed and further proofreading was needed.	Fair Demonstrates the work has been proof read and most geographic techniques have been observed.	Good All geographic technique have been observed, work is clearly set out and the work indicates it has been proof read.

Keywords:

Due Date - Friday 29th June

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric