UNIT #1Project Rubric
Knowledge and Understanding
LEVEL 4
Meets project requirements
with a high degree.
□ History
□ Advantage/
Disadvantages
□ Projectile Motion
□ Forces
□ Circular Motion
□ Linear Motion
□ Other
□ All definitions and concepts
are used correctly and with a
high degree.
□ The language and flow of the
report shows that you have a
good understanding about
the links between concepts.
□ Report covers all the points
listed to the left with a high
degree of detail.
□
□
□
□ Report also discusses
concepts from unit #1 or
other areas of physics.
□
All the level 3 checks plus:
Communication
□
□
Format
□
Referencing
□
Spelling/grammar
□
Vocabulary and
terminology
□
Organization
□
Diagrams and
tables.
□
□
□
Helpful diagrams are
included to explain the
procedure
Calculations and
measurements have all the
proper units.
The report uses all the
proper terminology and it is
written well.
All ideas and conclusions
are supported with facts
and evidence.
LEVEL 2
Meets most of the project
requirements
LEVEL 3
Meets project requirements
All of the definitions and
concepts are used with the
proper terminology and in
the right context.
Report covers all the points
listed to the left.
□
Most of the definitions and
concepts are used with the
proper terminology and in
the right context.
□
Report covers most of the
points listed to the left or
covers all the points to the
left in little detail.
The concepts and ideas
are pieced together without
clearly showing the links
between them
Report has all the necessary
lab sections in the proper
order.
□
Research is properly
referenced
□
Report is written with some
minor spelling and grammar
mistakes
□
□
LEVEL 1
Meets some of the project
requirements.
□
Some of the definitions and
concepts are used with the
proper terminology and in the
right context
□
Report covers the physics
concepts listed to the left in
little detail.
□
Only includes a Works
Cited page without proper
referencing
Only includes a Works Cited
page that lists only websites
in the incorrect format.
□
Report is written with some
major spelling and
grammar mistakes and/or
many minor ones.
Report is written with many
major spelling and grammar
mistakes and many minor
ones.
□
Missing two or three
sections of a proper lab
report.
□
Calculations are not
complete and are messy.
□
The report uses little of the
terminology from class in
the right context.
□
Report contains the proper
graphs.
□
All diagrams and tables are
made neatly.
□
Missing one section of a
proper lab report.
□
Units are included in most
calculations
□
Calculations are complete
but are messy.
□
Graphs are drawn neatly
and meet all the criteria for a
good graph.
□
Graphs are drawn neatly
but do not meet all the
criteria for a good graph.
□
The sections of the project
have the proper format.
Thinking and Inquiry
All the level 3 criteria plus:
□
The hypothesis is
supported by research
□
The procedure is so clearly
written that another group
could repeat your lab and
get the same results.
□
□
Purpose
□
Hypothesis
□
Procedure
□
Observations
□
Calculations
□
Analysis
Questions
□
Evaluation
□
□
You have more than the
minimum of three sources
of error.
You write insightful
responses in the analysis
section that go beyond just
a simple answer.
All conclusions are based
on the relationships and
data collected in the lab.
□
The report describes how
each variable is measured
and controlled to a high
degree.
□
The potential sources of
error listed in the preplanning stage had little
impact on the results
because the procedure
was designed to minimize
them.
Application
All of level 3 plus…
□
□
Longest Distance
□
Accuracy
□
The project shows signs of
creativity, innovation, and
an excellent eye for detail.
The project exceeds the
project requirements.
□
The purpose of the
investigation is clearly
stated
□
A hypothesis is written well
and is supported by facts.
□
The procedure is clearly
written in a number stepby-step format.
□
Observations are recorded
in a table.
□
The data obtained from the
experiment is reasonable.
□
Data analysis and any
calculations are clearly
written.
□
At least three valid sources
of error are properly
discussed using format
source, effect on outcome,
and method to eliminate it
in the future.
□
□
□
The report describes the
independent and
dependent variables and
one or two controlled
variables.
The procedure and section
#2 describe potential
sources of error.
The project is designed
well and meets all
requirements.
□
The project performs well
on demonstration day.
□
The design shows
evidence of putting the
research into practice.
□
The lab report has all the
proper elements.
□
Hypothesis is stated but is
not supported by strong
facts or evidence.
□
□
□
The lab report has most of
the proper elements.
□
The procedure is missing
some minor steps that
would prevent another
group from completing the
lab.
Hypothesis is stated but is
not supported by any facts or
evidence.
□
The data from the
experiment is not totally
reasonable
The procedure is missing
some major steps that would
prevent another group from
completing the lab.
□
The data is not well written or
accurate.
□
All of the analysis is
attempted but more than a
few are not supported by
evidence in the lab or are
incorrect.
□
Less than three sources of
error are properly discussed
using format source, effect
on outcome, and method to
eliminate it in the future.
□
The group lists the
independent and dependent
variables.
□
Shows little evidence of
planning
□
The project is complete.
□
It does not perform on
demonstration day.
□
The project looks like it was
assemble at the last minute
with no attention to detail.
□
All of the analysis are
attempted but a few are not
supported by evidence in
the lab
□
At least three sources of
error are properly
discussed using format
source, effect on outcome,
and method to eliminate it
in the future.
□
The group lists the
independent and
dependent variables and
one or two controlled
variables.
□
Shows some evidence of
planning.
□
The project meets the
minimum requirements.
□
□
The project does not
perform on demonstration
day, but a video exists of it
working
The project has some
minor flaws in the design.