Skip to main content
sign in
Username
Password
forgot?
Sign up
Share
help_outline
help
Pricing
Request Info
Please enable JavaScript on your web browser
menu
iRubric: Engineering Design Process: Build a Toy rubric
find rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Engineering Design Process: Build a Toy
Engineering Design Process: Simple Machine Robots
This rubric is used to assess the students' use of the engineering design process for designing a simple machine robot.
Rubric Code:
XX6942A
By
jehlers
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject:
Engineering
Type:
Project
Grade Levels:
6-8
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
Engineering Design Process
Below Poor
0 pts
Poor
1 pts
Fair
2 pts
Good
3 pts
Excellent
4 pts
Ask - Group
Below Poor
No evidence of defining the problem, or identifying the criteria and constraints was observed in the group
Poor
Little evidence of defining the problem, or identifying the criteria and constraints was observed in the group.
Fair
Some evidence of defining the problem, or identifying the criteria and constraints was observed in the group
Good
Good evidence of defining the problem and identifying the criteria and constraints was observed in the group
Excellent
Excellent evidence of defining the problem and identifying the criteria and constraints was observed in the group
Explore - Group
Below Poor
No evidence of research, learning new skills, and brainstorming and sketching were observed in the group.
Poor
Little evidence of research, learning new skills, and brainstorming and sketching were observed in the group.
Fair
Some evidence of research, learning new skills, and brainstorming and sketching were observed in the group.
Good
Good evidence of research, learning new skills, and brainstorming and sketching were observed in the group.
Excellent
Excellent evidence of research, learning new skills, and brainstorming and sketching were observed in the group.
Model - Group
Below Poor
No evidence of choosing the best solution, or building a model or prototype was observed by the group.
Poor
Little evidence of choosing the best solution, or building a model or prototype was observed by the group.
Fair
Some evidence of choosing the best solution, or building a model or prototype was observed by the group.
Good
Good evidence of choosing the best solution, or building a model or prototype was observed by the group.
Excellent
Excellent evidence of choosing the best solution, or building a model or prototype was observed by the group.
Explore - Group
Below Poor
No evidence of how to conduct a fair test or the strengths and weaknesses of the model/prototype were observed by the group.
Poor
Little evidence of how to conduct a fair test or the strengths and weaknesses of the model/prototype were observed by the group.
Fair
Some evidence of how to conduct a fair test or the strengths and weaknesses of the model/prototype were observed by the group.
Good
Good evidence of how to conduct a fair test or the strengths and weaknesses of the model/prototype were observed by the group.
Excellent
Excellent evidence of how to conduct a fair test or the strengths and weaknesses of the model/prototype were observed by the group.
Evaluate - Group
Below Poor
No evidence was explained about how the model solved or didn't solve the problem, and how it could be improved
Poor
Little evidence was explained about how the model solved or didn't solve the problem, and how it could be improved.
Fair
Some evidence was explained about how the model solved or didn't solve the problem, and how it could be improved.
Good
Good evidence was explained about how the model solved or didn't solve the problem, and how it could be improved.
Excellent
Excellent evidence was explained about how the model solved or didn't solve the problem, and how it could be improved.
Criteria - Group
Below Poor
No evidence of one moving part on the model was observed.
Poor
Fair
Good
The model had one moving part.
Excellent
The model had more than one moving part other than moving tires.
Constraints - Group
Below Poor
Completely disregarded time constraint.
Poor
Did not use time well. Time was wasted during the design process.
Fair
Sometimes used time well. There were times when the student was off task during the design process
Good
Good use of time, there were a few times when the student was off task, however for the majority of the design process the time was well spent.
Excellent
Excellent use of time. The student stayed on task during the design process.
Participation - Student
Below Poor
Completely off task
Poor
Many reminders to stay on task were given to the student.
Fair
Some reminders to stay on task were given to the student.
Good
Very little reminders to stay on task were given to the student.
Excellent
The student was on task all the time.
Subjects:
Engineering
Types:
Project
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More Engineering rubrics
More Project rubrics
Do more with this rubric:
Preview
Preview this rubric.
Edit
Modify this rubric.
Copy
Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.
Print
Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize
Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark
Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run
Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade
Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate
Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish
Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email
Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss
Discuss this rubric with other members.
Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.
Only with iRubric
tm
.
Copyright © 2024
Reazon Systems, Inc.
All rights reserved.
n16
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.