Individual Research
| 4
| 3 | 2
| 1
|
| Complete analysis of the tactics used in your specific focus area | Thorough analysis of the tactics used.
| Quality discussion of obvious tactics, but fails to analyze completely.
| Analysis somewhat addresses the topic but lacks enough information.
| Little to no analysis on the tactics used in your focus area.
|
Explanation of the consequences that were felt because of your focus area's results.
| Careful explanation of the consequences.
| Good analysis but failed to take into account long term consequences.
| Valiant effort, but failed to recognize the complete consequences.
| Poor analysis of the consequences that occurred. |
Strong analysis on how your focus area would approach the situation of your class.
| Well written plan with great attention paid to the tactics of your focus area.
| Strong analysis that lacks the attention to tactics of your focus area. | Analysis is good but fails to sufficiently use focus area.
| Weak analysis with little attention paid to the facts.
|
Analysis of whether or not your focus area's proposed plan would be successful for yoursituation.
| An insightful analysis of whether or not this plan will work.
| Answered the question but did not support the assertions made.
| Attempted to answer the question but failed to make a statement. Did not answer the question completely.
| Little to no regard to the question.
|
Overall Mechanics
| An error-free essay. Smooth transistions with no grammatical errors.
| Few grammatical errors with no spelling errors.
| Some grammatical errors with very few misspelled words.
| An essay filled with grammatical and spelling errors.
|
| | | | | |
Group Work
| 4
| 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Organization: Was the group able to work together? Is their essay well organized? | Organization was perfect. The paper was well thought out.
| The majority of the paper is well organized.
| Portions of the paper are organized. Seems to lack overall cohesiveness.
| Poorly organized paper, jumps from topic to topic.
|
Is the plan of attack well thought out? Does it use the roles that were given?
| A well-thought out plan that has a great deal of detail.
| Plan is mostly thought out. There are good ideas but it lacks in overall depth.
| Plan is somewhat thought out but uses few details.
| Plan does not use theroles that were provided. It is not well thought out and lacks detail.
|
Does the group provide support for their decisions? Do they tell the teacher why they chose the elements of their plan?
| A paper with support for every one of their decisions. It shows exactly the thought processes and how they made their decisions.
| Group gives support for most things and tells why they chose some elements of their plan.
| Group gives support for some things, but leaves out vital information on others. | No support at all, the decisions made in the plan are not mentioned at all in the support section.
|
| Overall Presentation of the group paper: Are there grammatical and spelling mistakes? | Error-free paper that was very well written. No spelling or grammatical errors.
| A solid paper with 3-4 grammatial and/or spelling errors.
| A paper with 5-6 grammatical and/or spelling errors.
| A paper filled with 7 or more grammatical and/or spelling errors.
|
Overall group efficiency: Did the group work well together?
| The group worked great together. All members were involved and they got the task done in a timely fashion. | The group worked well at most points. All members were actively involved. | The group had difficulty staying on task, and some members had to be reminded of their responsibilities. | Group did not work well with each other. Work was not evenly distributed and members were often off task. |