Social Science Experiment: Panel Discussion Assessment Rubric

Criteria	Level 4	Level 3	Level 2	Level 1
Clarity of Speech	-Voice is clearly enunciated, well projected, and can be heard from anywhere in the room. -Voice modulates for effect. Student pauses effectively for emphasis. -Pace is appropriate. -Confident posture, physical gestures are used to emphasize points effectively throughout. -Makes eye contact audience, successfully holding audience attention.	-Voice is clearly enunciated, well projected, and can be heard from anywhere in the room. -Voice modulates. Student may pause for emphasis. -Pace is appropriate although student sometimes speaks too fast. -Posture is confident posture. Student may use gestures to emphasize points. -Makes eye contact with some of the audience, and usually held audience attention.	-Parts of presentation cannot be heard due to problems with enunciation, and projection of voice. - Little variation in voice modulation. Student may not pause for emphasis. -Pace is too fast. -Student does not exhibit a confident posture. Student attempts to use gestures which may be ineffective at times. -Student attempts to make eye contact with variable success in holding audience attention. Too much reliance on notes at times.	-Most of presentation cannot not be understood due to poor enunciation; voice is not projected and is barely audible in some parts of the room. -Voice does not modulate. Student does not pause for emphasis. -Pace is too fast. -Student does not exhibit a confident posture. Student does not use gestures to emphasize points. -Student does not attempt to make eye contact with audience or is reading from notes. Student does not hold audience attention.
Content	-Presentation is informative and engaging. -Hypothesis is clearly stated and there is evidence of mastery of the topic. -Appropriate vocabulary and syntax is used throughout. -Student draws from a variety of examples and clearly states supporting evidence.	-Presentation is informative and engaging. -Hypothesis is stated and there is evidence of understanding of the topic. -Appropriate vocabulary and syntax is used. -Student draws from examples and states supporting evidence.	-Presentation is informative but lacks interest at times. -Hypothesis stated, but is weak. There are areas where evidence of understanding of the topic falters. -Appropriate vocabulary and syntax are not consistently used. -Student may draw from examples but does not state supporting evidence.	-Presentation has some informative moments, but lacks interest. -Hypothesis is unclear or may not be stated. There is some evidence of understanding of the topic. -Appropriate vocabulary and syntax are not utilized, or use is flawed. -Student does not draw from examples and does not state supporting evidence, or reasoning is flawed.

Criteria	Level 4	Level 3	Level 2	Level 1
Creativity	-Student effectively uses aids to support and illustrate topic. -Innovative and engaging methods are used to convey knowledge to peers throughout.	-Student uses aids to support and illustrate topic. -Engaging methods are used to convey knowledge to peers throughout.	-Student has aids to illustrate topic but they may not be effective, or student fails to link aids to topic. -Methods used to convey knowledge are used at time with varying degrees of effectiveness.	-Student does not have aids or does not attempt to use aids to support or illustrate topic. -Methods used to convey knowledge are not effective and result in loss of audience interest.
Question and Answer Period	-Addresses all questions with confidence. -Demonstrates analysis and mastery of topic in addressing questions. -Successfully involves all class members in discussion and queries, validating all inquiries.	-Addresses questions with confidence. -Demonstates analysis and understanding of topic. -Involves all class members in discussion and queries, validating inquiries.	-Addresses questions with some confidence. -Some errors in analysis and application of topic occur but do not confuse the issue overall. -Directs some attention to audience and attempts to validate inquiries with some difficulty.	-Addresses questions with difficulty or does not answer questions at all. -Student cannot answer questions when pressed by members of the audience. -Does not direct attention to audience. Does not attempt to validate inquiries.

Social Science Experiment

Scientific Method Paper Assessment Rubric

Criteria	Level 4	Level 3	Level 2	Level 1
Hypothesis	-Hypothesis is a clear, measurable/testable statement, using language appropriate to the Social Sciences, logically connected to the problem/social situation observed.	-Hypothesis is a measurable/testable statement, using language appropriate to the Social Sciences, connected to the problem/social situation observed	-Hypothesis is a measurable/testable statement but may not be clearly stated, or language may be inappropriately used.	-Hypothesis is not a measurable/testable statement, or it is not clearly stated, and language appropriate to the Social Sciences is not used or is used inappropriately.
Observation	- A separate, detailed rough copy, of the observations is included. -All trials of the experiment are outlined in great detail. -Data is well organized and is easy to comprehend. -Observations address the question and hypothesis chosen.	-A separate, rough copy of the observations is included. -Successive trials of the experiment are outlined in detail, although may be lacking in data at times. -Data is organized and easy to comprehend. -Observations address the question and hypothesis chosen.	-A separate, rough copy of the observations is included. -Successive trials of the experiment are outlined, but are lacking in data and/or detail. -Organization is flawed, which may interfere with meaning and/or comprehension at times. -Observations usually pertain to the question and hypothesis chosen, though some seem irrelevant or disjointed.	-A separate, rough copy of the observations is not included, or is incomplete. -Successive trials of the experiment are not evident or data is severely lacking. There is not detail. -Organization is flawed which interferes with meaning and comprehension. -Observations do not pertain to the question and/ or hypothesis chosen. Most observations seem irrelevant and disjointed.
Methodology	-The experiment is explained thoroughly and includes reasons for all decisions. -Valid steps: student chooses the most logical location; data is from a variety of trials/sources; great care is taken in the recording data which is carried out unobtrusively and is meticulously described. -Includes date/time period, location, and manner of observation. -The methodology is stated so that someone could repeat the exact same experiment, based on the explanation.	-Each step of the experiment is explained and includes reasons for all decisions, although could be a bit more thorough. -Valid steps: student chooses a logical location; data is from a variety of trials/sources; care was taken in recording data which is carried out unobtrusively, although it could be a bit more meticulous in its description. -Includes date/time period, location, and manner of observation. -The methodology is stated so that someone could repeat the exact experiment based on the explanation.	-Some steps of the experiment are not explained and/or reasons for all decisions are not always included. Could be more thorough. -Errors in one or two of the following steps: choosing a logical location; data not from a variety of trials/sources; care is not taken in recording data unobtrusively or meticulously. -Does not include date/time period, location, or manner of observation. -The methodology is stated so that someone would have difficulty repeating the same experiment based on the explanation.	-Some steps of the experiment are not explained and reasons for all decisions were not always included. Not very thorough. -Errors in many of the following steps: choosing a logical location; data not from a variety of trials/sources; care was not taken in recording data unobtrusively or meticulously. -Does not include date/time period, location, or manner of observation. -The methodology is stated in such a way that someone else could not repeat the same experiment based on the explanation.
	Level 4	Level 3	Level 2	Level 1
Conclusion	-Conclusion pertains to the question posed, hypothesis and observations. -Student analyzes, information fully and concisely by including a theory/thorough rationale that explains observations. -Plausible alternative solutions to the problem are stated. -Rationale behind conclusion is clearly stated with supporting evidence. -Evidence of student understanding of the experiment and problem solving process.	-Conclusion pertains to the question posed, hypothesis and observations. -Student analyzes information by including a theory/thorough rationale that explains observations. -Alternative solutions may be stated. -Rationale behind conclusion is weak. -Evidence of student understanding of the experiment.	-Conclusion pertains to the question posed and observations .thesis although hypothesis is weakly stated. -Student attempts to analyze information. -Alternative solutions may be stated, but they are implausible or weak. -Rationale behind conclusion is not fully stated. -Some understanding of the experiment is evident.	-Conclusion does not pertain to one or both of question posed, hypothesis, or observations. -Student does not analyze information or analysis is weak and/or unclear. -Alternative solutions are not stated. -Rationale behind conclusion is not stated. -Understanding of the experiment is weak or not evident.
Format	-Spelling, grammar and punctuation are correctly used with only one or two errors. -Written portion is bound in a duo tang and word-processed. Title page, journal, and rough copy of observations are included. -All headings and all steps of the scientific method are included. -A sense of audience is evident. Student uses vocabulary appropriate to the chosen social science discipline.	-Spelling, grammar and punctuation are correctly used with very few errors present. -Written portion is bound in a duo tang and word-processed. Title page, journal, and rough copy of observations are included. -All headings and all steps of the scientific method are included. -A sense of audience is evident. Student uses vocabulary appropriate to the chosen social science discipline but a few key terms encountered in class were overlooked.	-Errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation occur but do not interfere with meaning. -Written portion is not bound in a duo-tang (but is bound by some other method) or it is not word-processed. One of the following has been omitted: title page, journal, or rough copy of observations. -Sense of audience is weak. Vocabulary appropriate to the chosen social science discipline is not used consistently, or is misused.	-Errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation frequently occur, which make it difficult to understand work. Does not appear to be proofread and/or edited. -One or more of the following has been omitted: binding of report; word processing; title page; journal; and/or rough copy of observations. -Sense of audience is weak or not evident. Vocabulary appropriate to the chose social science discipline is ignored or consistently misused.

Journal Rubric

Level 4	-4 separate entries included -the writer reflects, showing questioning and examination of process, elaborating on difficulties encountered and proposes solutions -appropriate terminology is used for the discipline -spelling and grammatical conventions observed, word processed
Level 3	-4 separate entries included -the writer reflects, showing questioning and examination of process, elaborating on difficulties encountered but either doesn't propose solutions or solutions proposed are not logical to situation -appropriate terminology is used -a few spelling and grammatical errors are present but not enough to distract reader from content, word processed
Level 2	-3 entries, 1 missing -the writer reflects, showing questioning and examination of process, but doesn't elaborate on difficulties encountered or doesn't propose solutions -not all terminology is appropriate -spelling and grammar conventions are weak, many errors, hinders comprehension for the reader, word processed
Level 1	-only 1 or 2 entries completed -writer does not reflect more than once, shows questioning of process but does not elaborate on difficulties encountered or does not propose solutions -no attempt to use appropriate terminology -incoherent due to large amount of spelling and grammar errors and not word processed