iRubric: DAS review sheet rubric

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

DAS review sheet

Acting: Scene Work II

DAS review assignment

Rubric Code: Y44XW6

By ceskin

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Arts and Design

Type: Presentation

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Performance Rubric
	Exceptional (N/A)	Very Strong (N/A)	Good (N/A)	Fair (N/A)	Poor (N/A)
Introduction/Epilogue	Exceptional Director superbly prepared for presentation. Clarity in discussing setting, motivation, and editing issues. *Strong sense of investment in scene.	Very Strong Director well- prepared for presentation. Well-considered in discussing setting, motivation, and editing issues. *Sense of investment in scene.	Good Director prepared for presentation. Provides discussion of setting, motivation, and editing issues. *Some investment in scene.	Fair Director somewhat prepared for presentation. Does not discuss setting, motivation, and editing issues in any depth. *Little sense of investment in scene.	Poor Director not prepared for presentation. Fails to discuss one or all of the talking points. *Seems disconnected from scene.
Objective, Action, Obstacle Tactics	Exceptional Successfully identified objective, obstacles and actions/tactics. Cast clearly and consistently plays the action identified in analysis. *Actions were fully developed, leveled, and appropriately colored for the scene.	Very Strong Successfully identified and conveys goals, obstacles and actions/tactics clearly. Has clarity related to purpose of character's actions. *Cat plays actions with appropriate intensity.	Good *Successfully identified goals, obstacle and tactics/actions in analysis but same were not always discernable in the scene.	Fair At times the goals, obstacle and tactics/actions were unclear to the viewer; we didn't always know what characters wanted. Nonspecific action in scene (or) at times actions seemed disconnected.	Poor Only generally and inconsistently identifies the goals, obstacles and tactics/actions of characters. Lacks specificity of action
Setting / Props / Costumes	Exceptional Setting is perfectly conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. All props are believable and necessary to further action. *Costuming is ideally suited to characters and setting.	Very Strong Setting is well-conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are predominantly believable and necessary to further action. *Costuming is well-suited to characters and setting.	Good Setting is conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are plausible and help to further action. *Costuming is suited to characters and setting.	Fair Setting is sometimes conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are sometimes believable and further action. *Costuming is primarily suited to characters and setting.	Poor Setting is not really conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are not believable and necessary to further action. *Costuming is not suited to characters and setting.
Movement/blocking	Exceptional Director expertly uses blocking to enhance and add interest to the piece - very dynamic. Movement brought clarity to the action. Movements always reflect purpose, 100 percent motivated. All movement is character and situation appropriate and aids the story. *Movement helped reveal the subtext.	Very Strong Director uses blocking in a way that adds interest to the piece. Movements reflect purpose. Movement is character and situation appropriate and aids the story. Clarified subtext	Good Director's blocking was suitable to piece but lacked dynamics. Movements usually reflect purpose. Movement is mostly character and situation appropriate and aids the story. Subtext may not have been clarified	Fair Movements usually reflect purpose. Not all of the blocking is motivated. *Movement didn't always help support or reveal character, text, or subtext.	Poor Director's blocking is generally confusing and without purpose. Rehearsed blocking is forgotten in execution *Characters move randomly and without purpose during the scene.
Editing of Scene/Length	Exceptional Editing of scene is barely noticable. Scene is wonderfully fluid. *Length is just right.	Very Strong Editing of scene is noticable, but not in a bad way. Scene flows without breaks. *Length is within required limits.	Good Missing sections of scene make scene slightly less successful. Scene seems a little bumpy. *Length just within limits	Fair Chunks of text seem to have been pulled, causing difficulty for audience. Scene is uneven. *Length just outside limits.	Poor Editing poor; interferes with scene success. Scene is rough and difficult to follow. *Length is well outside of the limits.
Engagement with Text	Exceptional Scene is fluent. Text holds to what is written. *Actors own the words.	Very Strong Overall, scene moves. Actors read the lines and know the meaning of them, but there is some fumbling with cues.	Good Scene flows fairly well, but there are moments of awkwardness. Meaning of line is clear and communicated.	Fair May be a lapse but actor(s) easily recovers. Fumbling due to spotty engagement with scene. *Moments when actor is looking for line.	Poor Scene is halting. May be frequent breaks to find place. Seems unfamiliar. May not have full grasp of meaning. Actor needs promptings.
Believability	Exceptional Students are fully invested in the scene as the director has laid it out. Expertly demonstrates the unique characters in the situation. *Engaged in the "magic if," endows setting, colleagues, props, event.	Very Strong Students are not 100 percent invested 100 percent of the time. Characters are actualized and alive. *Clearly demonstrates the characters and motivations in this situation throughout the scene.	Good Students are not 100 percent invested and in their scene. The character isn't fully actualized. Demonstrates the character in this situation fairly consistently. May lack motivations for characters or situation.	Fair Students show average commitment to participating in the experience. The characters lack depth. *Either lacks depth of character and situation or inconsistent in conveying it.	Poor Any investment in character and situation is inconsistent and mostly ineffective. Unable to convey characterization. *No sense of motivation in this situation.
Character Development	Exceptional Characters' motivations are highly defined. Life and world of character is illuminated brilliantly through performance.	Very Strong Characters' motivations are well-defined. Life and world of character is clearly displayed through performance.	Good Characters' motivation is defined. Life and world of character is adequately illuminated by performance.	Fair Characters' motivations are lacking at times. Life and world of character is not fully illuminated by performance.	Poor Very little development of characters is present Life and world of character is not present.

Keywords:

Theatre Scene Performance Directing

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric

Performance Rubric
	Exceptional (N/A)	Very Strong (N/A)	Good (N/A)	Fair (N/A)	Poor (N/A)
Introduction/Epilogue	Exceptional Director superbly prepared for presentation. Clarity in discussing setting, motivation, and editing issues. *Strong sense of investment in scene.	Very Strong Director well- prepared for presentation. Well-considered in discussing setting, motivation, and editing issues. *Sense of investment in scene.	Good Director prepared for presentation. Provides discussion of setting, motivation, and editing issues. *Some investment in scene.	Fair Director somewhat prepared for presentation. Does not discuss setting, motivation, and editing issues in any depth. *Little sense of investment in scene.	Poor Director not prepared for presentation. Fails to discuss one or all of the talking points. *Seems disconnected from scene.
Objective, Action, Obstacle Tactics	Exceptional Successfully identified objective, obstacles and actions/tactics. Cast clearly and consistently plays the action identified in analysis. *Actions were fully developed, leveled, and appropriately colored for the scene.	Very Strong Successfully identified and conveys goals, obstacles and actions/tactics clearly. Has clarity related to purpose of character's actions. *Cat plays actions with appropriate intensity.	Good *Successfully identified goals, obstacle and tactics/actions in analysis but same were not always discernable in the scene.	Fair At times the goals, obstacle and tactics/actions were unclear to the viewer; we didn't always know what characters wanted. Nonspecific action in scene (or) at times actions seemed disconnected.	Poor Only generally and inconsistently identifies the goals, obstacles and tactics/actions of characters. Lacks specificity of action
Setting / Props / Costumes	Exceptional Setting is perfectly conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. All props are believable and necessary to further action. *Costuming is ideally suited to characters and setting.	Very Strong Setting is well-conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are predominantly believable and necessary to further action. *Costuming is well-suited to characters and setting.	Good Setting is conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are plausible and help to further action. *Costuming is suited to characters and setting.	Fair Setting is sometimes conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are sometimes believable and further action. *Costuming is primarily suited to characters and setting.	Poor Setting is not really conveyed through "stage" dressing and character behavior. Props are not believable and necessary to further action. *Costuming is not suited to characters and setting.
Movement/blocking	Exceptional Director expertly uses blocking to enhance and add interest to the piece - very dynamic. Movement brought clarity to the action. Movements always reflect purpose, 100 percent motivated. All movement is character and situation appropriate and aids the story. *Movement helped reveal the subtext.	Very Strong Director uses blocking in a way that adds interest to the piece. Movements reflect purpose. Movement is character and situation appropriate and aids the story. Clarified subtext	Good Director's blocking was suitable to piece but lacked dynamics. Movements usually reflect purpose. Movement is mostly character and situation appropriate and aids the story. Subtext may not have been clarified	Fair Movements usually reflect purpose. Not all of the blocking is motivated. *Movement didn't always help support or reveal character, text, or subtext.	Poor Director's blocking is generally confusing and without purpose. Rehearsed blocking is forgotten in execution *Characters move randomly and without purpose during the scene.
Editing of Scene/Length	Exceptional Editing of scene is barely noticable. Scene is wonderfully fluid. *Length is just right.	Very Strong Editing of scene is noticable, but not in a bad way. Scene flows without breaks. *Length is within required limits.	Good Missing sections of scene make scene slightly less successful. Scene seems a little bumpy. *Length just within limits	Fair Chunks of text seem to have been pulled, causing difficulty for audience. Scene is uneven. *Length just outside limits.	Poor Editing poor; interferes with scene success. Scene is rough and difficult to follow. *Length is well outside of the limits.
Engagement with Text	Exceptional Scene is fluent. Text holds to what is written. *Actors own the words.	Very Strong Overall, scene moves. Actors read the lines and know the meaning of them, but there is some fumbling with cues.	Good Scene flows fairly well, but there are moments of awkwardness. Meaning of line is clear and communicated.	Fair May be a lapse but actor(s) easily recovers. Fumbling due to spotty engagement with scene. *Moments when actor is looking for line.	Poor Scene is halting. May be frequent breaks to find place. Seems unfamiliar. May not have full grasp of meaning. Actor needs promptings.
Believability	Exceptional Students are fully invested in the scene as the director has laid it out. Expertly demonstrates the unique characters in the situation. *Engaged in the "magic if," endows setting, colleagues, props, event.	Very Strong Students are not 100 percent invested 100 percent of the time. Characters are actualized and alive. *Clearly demonstrates the characters and motivations in this situation throughout the scene.	Good Students are not 100 percent invested and in their scene. The character isn't fully actualized. Demonstrates the character in this situation fairly consistently. May lack motivations for characters or situation.	Fair Students show average commitment to participating in the experience. The characters lack depth. *Either lacks depth of character and situation or inconsistent in conveying it.	Poor Any investment in character and situation is inconsistent and mostly ineffective. Unable to convey characterization. *No sense of motivation in this situation.
Character Development	Exceptional Characters' motivations are highly defined. Life and world of character is illuminated brilliantly through performance.	Very Strong Characters' motivations are well-defined. Life and world of character is clearly displayed through performance.	Good Characters' motivation is defined. Life and world of character is adequately illuminated by performance.	Fair Characters' motivations are lacking at times. Life and world of character is not fully illuminated by performance.	Poor Very little development of characters is present Life and world of character is not present.