Skip to main content
iRubric: Tetrix Robotic Engineering rubric

iRubric: Tetrix Robotic Engineering rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Tetrix Robotic Engineering 
Robotic Engineering
This rubric is designed to assess the design of the team's robot.
Rubric Code: H79394
By wiroi1
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Computers  
Type: Project  
Grade Levels: 6-8

Powered by iRubric Robot Design Rubric
  Needs Improvement

7 pts

Fair

7.5 pts

Good

8.5 pts

Excellent

9.5 pts

Innovative Design
5 %

Needs Improvement

Design and structure are standard.
Strategy for task expected and not very imaginative.
Fair

Design exhibits some creativity in terms of use but the robot's appearance is messy and can only accomplish a single task.
Good

Design creative; team exhibited some concern for look.
Unique/creative strategy for completing task(s); however, robot mainly does just one task.
Excellent

Design creative, both in function and appearance.
Robot is multi-functional.
Strategy, Process, Problem-Solving
15 %

Needs Improvement

No design process (nitial concept, build, test, refinement).
Strategy based only on ease of task - did not maximize time, combine mission tasks or consider points.
Fair

Some forethought in initial design and process; however, refinement of robot not communicated.
Strategy often based on ease of task -few risks taken.
Good

Basic understanding of design process and conceptual planning, building, testing, refining of robot. Effective strategic planning with some challenging tasks.
Excellent

Communicates complete design process, from initial concept through build, test, and refinement.
Excellent/innovative strategy, combining mission tasks.
Locomotion & Navigation
20 %

Needs Improvement

Difficulty accomplishing same task on repeated missions; too fast or slow to accomplish task; movement inaccurate or inconsistent; use of remote awkward.
Fair

Accomplishes defined task sometimes; use of remote sometimes inconsistent and/or awkward.
Good

Accomplishes defined task most of the time; use of remote consistent and rarely awkward; pace of task natural and intentional.
Excellent

Accomplishes task(s) efficiently, consistently adjusting speed and position for optimum speed and accuracy.
Knowledge
5 %

Needs Improvement

Little knowledge of why some parts are located as they are on the robot; little or no understanding of what pieces did;
building appears primarily done by teacher.
Fair

Robot structure and programming shows minimal understanding of design; building seems primarily directed by teacher or certain team members.
Good

Robot structure and programming shows moderate understanding of underlying design;
building directed by team members, with help from teacher.
Excellent

Robot shows thorough understanding of underlying design;
building was accomplished by team members with little guidance from teacher.
Structural
5 %

Needs Improvement

Difficulty with robot assembly; base weak, falls apart when handled or run;<BR>
attachments weak and fall apart often; difficulty completing task.
Fair

Robot assembly done with few errors; robot base structure has some stabliity;<BR>
attachments difficult to apply.
Good

Slow robot assembly, with no errors; robot base stable, but not robust; attachments function most of the time;
Excellent

Robot assemble with no errors; robot base stable and robust; attachments function as expected; attachments perform tasks extremely well.
Troubleshooting
10 %

Needs Improvement

None; team relies on teacher to solve all issues.
Fair

Team recognizes and identifies issues but makes few attempts to fix with little or no success.
Good

Team performs troubleshooting most of the time; moderate success getting robot to achieve attempted objectives.
Excellent

Team always performs troubleshooting without being asked and works on robotic design and features until objectives are achieved.
Robotics Show
30 %

Needs Improvement

Team was unprepared; visuals lacked information or were plain; presentation was unprepared; team lacked enthusiasm and appeared unprofessional.
Fair

Team was somewhat prepared; visuals were mostly informative and interesting; talk was somewhat prepared but could have used more enthusiasm.
Good

Team was mostly prepared; visuals were informative and interesting; team was enthusiastic and prepared.
Excellent

Team was very prepared; visuals were imaginative, colorful, and interesting; team was very enthusiastic and presentation was dynamic.
Team Player
10 %

Needs Improvement

None; detracts from unity and excellence.
Fair

Very little. Is cooperative and offers some ideas in group settings but does very little work or has to be directed by other members of the team.
Good

Can be a good leader. Is cooperative and occasionally helps others in group setting; takes the initiative to complete daily goals but needs some guidance.
Excellent

Excellent leader who leads team with all aspects of daily goals and construction; is agreeable and cooperative and not dominating.



Keywords:
  • Robot Design


Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n98