- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Ethics Case Study rubric

(draft) edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Ethics Case Study Rubric Code: H22BWAB By boccuzzis Draft Public Rubric Subject: Philosophy Type: Presentation Grade Levels: 9-12

Ethics Case Study
	Poor 5 pts	Fair 10 pts	Good 15 pts	Excellent 20 pts
Knowledge of Philosophy	Poor Inaccurate knowledge of philosopher	Fair Some accurate knowledge of philosopher with some missing information	Good Accurate knowledge of the philosopher	Excellent Accurate and thorough knowledge of the philosopher
Elements of Philosophy	Poor No support was given	Fair Every point was not supported	Good Every major point was supported with ample examples and relevant evidence	Excellent Every major point was well supported with thorough evidence and reflection
Philosopher Questions	Poor Arguments were not clearly tied to the questions	Fair All arguments were tied to the questions but the organization was sometimes not clear or logical	Good Most arguments were clearly tied to the questions in a tight, logical fashion	Excellent All arguments were clearly tied to the questions and organized in a tight, logical fashion
Presentation	Poor Clearly no preparation for presentation and was unprepared. Student did not present in a clear and mature manner	Fair Some preparation but thought were not articulated clearly and coherently. Student sometimes in a clear manner	Good Preparation is evident and showed command of topic. Student prepared in a clear manner	Excellent Preparation is very evident and showed excellent command of the topic. Student presented in a clear and mature manner
Peer Evaluation	Poor Evaluator provided very little feedback and did not clearly choose the argument that they believe was most clearly articulated	Fair Evaluator provided some feedback and chose the argument that they believe was most clearly articulated	Good Evaluator provided thorough feedback and chose the argument that they believe was clearly articulated	Excellent Evaluator provided meaningful and thorough feedback and chose the argument that they believe was most clearly articulated