Goal Area 3 Rubric
Levels/Criteria
Unacceptable
Below Expectation
Acceptable
Proficient
Exemplary
Students will be
able to
demonstrate
understanding of
scientific
theories.
Makes no connection
between the natural
world and a given
theory.
Demonstrates a basic
understanding of some but
not all theories presented.
Is generally unable to
apply theory to specific
problems.
Demonstrates a basic level
of understanding of the
fundamentals of given
theories. Has difficulty
applying given theories to
specific problems.
Demonstrates
understanding of
fundamentals of given
theories. Can apply
theory to address familiar
problems at a basic level.
Demonstrates a thorough
understanding of given
theories and is able to
apply that understanding
to address to unfamiliar
problems.
Students will be
able to formulate
and test
hypotheses by
performing
laboratory,
simulation, or
field experiments
in a natural
science
discipline.
Lacks understanding of
scientific process.
Unable to construct
hypothesis from
preliminary data and
background knowledge
and theory.
Constructs hypothesis that
demonstrates significant
flaws or may be difficult to
test. Has difficulty
designing tests and
interpreting test results or
interprets test results
incorrectly.
Is generally able to
construct an adequate
hypothesis and design and
interpret appropriate tests
of hypotheses.
Demonstrates limited
scientific insight in
hypothesis construction or
testing
Demonstrates
understanding of scientific
process, constructs
adequate hypotheses from
preliminary data and
designs appropriate test
for hypothesis. May have
difficulty recognizing
alternate hypotheses.
Clearly and confidently
defines hypotheses that
are consistent with
preliminary data, designs
appropriate test(s) of
hypothesis and applies
test data appropriately to
determine if hypothesis is
rejected. Is able to utilize
multiple working
hypotheses.
Students will be
able to
• collect scientific
data in a natural
science
laboratory
experience, and
• analyze data
statistically and
graphically, while
appreciating its
sources of error
and uncertainty.
Fails to collect
reasonable data and/or
is unable to evaluate
data by any method.
Does not demonstrate
understanding of factors
controlling the validity of
data.
Is able to collect data
although errors may be
present. Shows little
concern for potential
sources of error even
when prompted. Has
difficulty evaluating data
graphically or statistically
and may not understand
how data could be applied
to make predictions.
Is able to collect
appropriate data; may not
fully understand
methodology or be able to
determine validity of data.
Is able to plot data in
graphical form and/or
complete simple statistical
measures. Has difficulty
interpreting trends in data.
Is able to collect good
quality data and exhibits a
basic understanding how
to improve the quality of
data. Is competent in
evaluating data graphically
and/or statistically but is
unable to fully appreciate
the implication of those
results.
Demonstrates thorough
understanding of data
collection process and the
potential sources and
magnitude of error. Is able
to evaluate trends within
data graphically or
statistically and apply
those trends to make
reasonable predictions.
Students will be
able to
communicate
results (i.e.,
experimental
findings,
analyses, and
interpretations)
both orally and in
writing.
Written assignments
unorganized, exhibit
poor writing quality,
lacking data or
interpretations. Fails to
meet most assignment
criteria. Oral
presentation poorly
prepared with no
concern for engaging
the audience.
Written submissions
minimally meet
assignment criteria.
Organization poor, data or
interpretations of low
quality. Oral presentations
lack organization, are read
from script, lack
appropriate graphics. Little
effort to engage the
audience
Written submissions meet
most assignment criteria.
Organization is adequate
and writing quality doesn’t
make the instructor cringe.
Oral presentations show
some evidence of
preparation, includes
appropriate graphics.
Presentation relies heavily
on notes but is otherwise
well done. Attempts to
engage audience.
Written submissions meet
all assignment criteria and
demonstrate good
organization and good
writing quality. Oral
presentations well
prepared, include
appropriate graphics.
Some prompting from
notes occurs but sincere
effort is made to engage
audience.
Written submissions fully
meet assignment criteria,
are well organized and
complete. Writing quality
is excellent. Oral
presentations well
prepared and on topic and
include appropriate
graphics. Not read from
script or is otherwise
fluently presented. Fully
engages audience.
Score/Level
Levels/Criteria
Unacceptable
Below Expectation
Acceptable
Proficient
Exemplary
Students will be
able to
•evaluate societal
issues from a
natural science
perspective,
•ask questions
about the
evidence
presented.
Demonstrates little or no
capacity for critical
evaluation of evidence
or no concern or
recognition of any
interconnectedness
between science and
social issues.
Recognizes some of
instances where science is
applied to social issues but
doesn’t seek to fully
understand degree of
interconnectedness.
Rarely inquires about
validity of evidence.
Recognizes
interconnectedness
between science and
society on specific issues
but does not fully evaluate
the issues. Modest level of
inquiry regarding validity of
evidence.
Recognizes and is able to
assess the
interconnectedness of
science and society on
most issues. Frequently
inquires about the validity
evidence.
Expresses thorough
understanding of the
interconnectedness
between science and
society. Expresses strong
desire to understand the
basis for interpretations or
other evidence presented.
Score/Level