iRubric: Portfolio Organization - Spring 2013 rubric

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

Portfolio Organization - Spring 2013

Portfolio Organization - Fall 2012

This is the rubric for grading the overall organization in the Student Portfolios in the Integrated Projects Curriculum of Messiah College Engineering Department. (v1.0, created 10/11 by TV, v2.0, revised 03/12 by DP, v2.1, revised 09/12 by TV, revised 04/13 by TV)

Rubric Code: YAXB9W

By mcengin

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Engineering

Type: Assessment

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Portfolio Organization
	Exemplary/Excellent 5 pts	Accomplished/Good 4 pts	Developing/Fair 3 pts	Deficient/Poor 2 pts
Overall Layout 3 pts	Exemplary/Excellent Portfolio professionally presented	Accomplished/Good Portfilio organized, but not neatly presented	Developing/Fair Portfolio neatly presented, but unorganized	Deficient/Poor Portfolio messy and unorganized
Title Page Completeness 1 pts Required elements are: - Student Name - Name of the Group and Project - Name of the instructor - Current Semester and Year	Exemplary/Excellent Complete title page containing all required elements	Accomplished/Good Incomplete title page missing one element	Developing/Fair Incomplete title page mssing two elements	Deficient/Poor Incomplete title page missing three or more elements or no title page
Table of Contents 1 pts Should include: - Listing of primary items and sections in the portfolio	Exemplary/Excellent Complete table of contents containing all primary items and sections	Accomplished/Good Table of contents missing one or two of the pimary items or sections	Developing/Fair Table of contents missing three or four of the primary items or sections	Deficient/Poor Table of contents missing five or more of the primary items or sections or no table of contents
Introductory Statement 3 pts	Exemplary/Excellent Well written and presented. Evidence of deep thought and reflection. Addresses all assigned questions. Satisfies the required word count.	Accomplished/Good Does not meet the technical requirements for “exemplary” (writing/ presentation/ or word count) but successfully addresses all questions.	Developing/Fair Has some technical issues (writing/ presentation/ word count) and shows little engagement with the issues. Some questions are not fully addressed.	Deficient/Poor Poorly written. Minimal responses to questions. Omits responses to two or more the assigned questions.
Closing Summary 3 pts Only required for Project IV students.	Exemplary/Excellent Well written and presented. Evidence of deep thought and reflection. Addresses all assigned questions. Satisfies the required word count.	Accomplished/Good Does not meet the technical requirements for “exemplary” (writing/ presentation/ or word count) but successfully addresses all questions.	Developing/Fair Has some technical issues (writing/ presentation/ word count) and shows little engagement with the issues. Some questions are not fully addressed.	Deficient/Poor Poorly written. Minimal responses to questions. Omits responses to two or more the assigned questions.

Keywords:

Messiah College Engineering Department IPC Portfolio

Subjects:

Engineering

Types:

Assessment

Discuss this rubric