Disaster Project Rubric Your disaster projects will be graded according to the rubric below. Group members will receive the same grade for all categories except for oral presentation skills. Each member will be graded separately on their oral presentation skills. Students not contributing will receive a grade of 0 in the oral presentation category. Grading Category Content Plate Tectonics: Was Plate Tectonics clearly explained and supported with evidence presented in class? Content Specific science: Were the specific tectonic conditions of the disaster clearly explained? Content Event specific facts and historydamage costs, death tolls, effect on history included Critical Thinking Organization: The website is well organized, and flows from page to page Written communication Product: Was the product free of spelling and grammar errors? Didn’t explain Plate Tectonics and didn’t utilize any supporting diagrams in the presentation. No evidence cited, or minimal evidence used to support Tectonic theory. 8----------9 Didn’t identify and/or describe the specific tectonic event. No mention of the tectonic plate or plates involved. No graphic showing the location of the event. 8----------9 The group failed to mention death tolls, damages, historical or social impact. No mention of what the experience would be like. Vaguely explained Plate Tectonics and/or utilized one simple diagram or drawing. Some evidence cited, but no convincing explanation given. Solid explanation of Plate Tectonics, with several pieces of evidence cited. Good, clear images used to support explanation. Completely understood Plate Tectonics, and used an abundance of evidence to support the theory. Images used are clear, appropriately sized, and of excellent quality. 10----------11 Briefly identified and described the specific tectonic event. Made mention of the tectonic plate or plates involved. Brief explanation of the plate boundary. No graphic showing the location of the event. 12----------13 Adequately modeled and described the specific event with an image to support their presentation. Plate(s) involved identified on map. Plate boundary type identified. 14----------15 Event science discussed in detailplates named, plate boundary type identified, high quality images used to support explanation. Plate(s) involved named and clearly and accurately identified on the map. 10----------11 Death tolls and damages mentioned, but minimal or no discussion of historical impact or experience. Human and social consequences of disaster not fully explained. 12----------13 The group clearly presented the death tolls and damage costs, and addressed the historical impact as well as described the experience itself. Some images used to support historical impact. 14----------15 The group clearly identified the damage costs and death tolls. Damage costs explained in current dollar values (where appropriate). Retelling of the event is graphic and vivid, and supported with appropriate images and graphics. 4 Website is random and disorganized. No apparent flow or pattern to order of pages. 6 Pages ordered, but reasoning for sequence may not be clear. Content not well organized. 8 Good flow, content organized, but little extra information. 10 Presentation is very well organized, pages follow an obvious sequence and order. Extensive thought is evident in progression of presentation. 8----------9 Presentation riddled with errors to the point of being distracting and difficult to read. 4 10----------11 Presentation has some grammar and spelling errors, but errors are not distracting. 12----------13 Presentation is free of grammar errors. A few spelling errors (<4) present. 14----------15 Presentation is completely free of spelling and grammar errors. An excellent piece of written work 6 8 10 Content Content Oral Presentation Website: Background color/image is appropriate. Font color, size are legible. All links are active. Images are appropriately sized for presentation. Video: Informative, well edited, adds to overall quality of presentation Presentations: Are the presentations of good quality? Are good oral communication skills employed? Font is not clearly visible. May be too small, bad color or both. Images are small and unclear. Numerous dead links. Website is riddled with technical errors and difficulties. Font is somewhat clearly visible, but at times may be difficult to read. Most images are of appropriate size. A few (<3) dead links. Website has occasional technical errors and difficulties. Font is clearly visible, and no trouble to read. Almost all images are of appropriate size. One dead link. Website has minimal technical errors and difficulties. Font is clearly visible. Font size and color are appropriate. An appropriate color scheme is used. All images are of appropriate size and clearly visible. No dead links. Website has no technical errors and difficulties. Overall high standard of excellence throughout entire website. 4 Minimal or no evidence of academic purpose of video. Poorly edited. No evidence of planning or organization. Random bits of film cobbled together at the last minute. 8----------9 Timid, tepid presentation orally and in the web site. Poor materials thrown together at the last minute. 6 A passable start, but video has some major issues- some evidence of pre-planning, but looks rushed. Could be a good product with more time and effort. 10----------11 A fair but poorly organized oral presentation with a passable but sub-standard web site. Heavy reliance on text in the presentation. 8 Nicely done video, but some issues in editing or scripting. Overall, a good piece of work with some minor issues. 10 Video is very well done- good scripting, dialogue is informative and dramatic. Good use of editing, transitions and music. Adds to the overall presence and quality of the product. 12----------13 Demonstration of good public speaking skills and organization. A good web site with good graphics. Minimal text is used. 14----------15 Presentation of the disaster to the class and others with clarity, poise and confidence. Minimal, if any text in the presentation. Rehearsing of presentation is evident. An excellent final product. 10----------11 12----------13 14----------15 8----------9 At the conclusion of this project, each group member will be evaluated by the other members of their group based on the collaboration rubric. The average of the ratings collected will be entered as the individual’s ‘work ethic’ score for this project. Disaster Event ___________________ Group Members 1. ___________________ 3. ___________________ 2. ___________________ 4. ___________________