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. ___________________