Skip to main content
sign in
Username
Password
forgot?
Sign up
Share
help_outline
help
Pricing
Request Info
Please enable JavaScript on your web browser
menu
iRubric: Pictorial Sketching rubric
find rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Pictorial Sketching
Pictorial Sketching
A rubric to grade Freehand Pictorial Sketches
Rubric Code:
CX676X4
By
hdcarter2015
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject:
Engineering
Type:
Assessment
Grade Levels:
9-12
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
Freehand Sketching
Poor / Failing
Below 70%
3.25 pts
Minimal / Needs Improvement
70-75%
3.75 pts
Basic
76-80%
4 pts
Proficient
81-90%
4.5 pts
Distinguished
91-100%
5 pts
Choice of Sketch
Poor / Failing
Draftsman/Engineer failed to communicate necessary information to viewers due to missing views, missing details and/or missing annotations. There is no evidence of the knowledge of industrially acceptable sketch types or views Nor the criteria for choosing an appropriate representation.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
Draftsman/Engineer failed to communicate necessary information to viewers due to missing views, missing details and/or missing annotations. There is no evidence of the knowledge of industrially acceptable sketch types or views Nor the criteria for choosing an appropriate representation.
Basic
Draftsman/Engineer comprehended the information needed to be communicated, however the chosen sketch style and views failed to include all the necessary information to viewers. Sketch style is industrially acceptable, however better choices for Views selected or Number of views could have improved viewer's ability to obtain information necessary to accomplish stated goals.
Proficient
Draftsman/Engineer comprehended the information needed to be communicated through the sketch and correctly created the appropriate sketch type. Better choices for Views selected or Number of views could have improved viewer's ability to obtain information necessary to accomplish stated goals.
Distinguished
Draftsman/Engineer fully comprehended the information needed to be communicated through the sketch and correctly created the appropriate sketch type & Number of views. Viewers of the sketch have no difficulty obtaining information necessary to accomplish stated goals.
Construction Lines
Poor / Failing
There is little or no visual difference between any of the lines used to create the sketch, causing visual confusion & uncertainty. Lines are fuzzy or multi-width, do not cross at corners are wavy or obviously not Horizontal, Vertical, Parallel or Perpendicular.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
There is little or no visual difference between some of the lines used to create the sketch, causing some visual confusion & uncertainty. Lines are fuzzy or multi-width, but corners are crossed. Multiple lines are wavy or obviously not Horizontal, Vertical, Parallel or Perpendicular.
Basic
Construction lines used to create the sketch are Single width, and even though they could be lighter, they do not significantly detract from the visual clarity of the sketch. Some lines are are fuzzy or multi-width. A few lines are not Straight ( Horizontal / Vertical ), Parallel, & Perpendicular. All corners have been crossed to create visual reference points.
Proficient
Construction lines used to create the sketch are Single width, and even though they could be lighter, they do not significantly detract from the visual clarity of the sketch. Most lines are Straight ( Horizontal / Vertical ), Parallel, & Perpendicular. All corners have been crossed to create visual reference points.
Distinguished
Construction lines used to create the sketch are Single width, barely visible at arm's length, and do not detract from the visual clarity of the sketch. When necessary all lines are Straight ( Horizontal / Vertical ), Parallel, & Perpendicular. All corners have been crossed to create visual reference points.
Object Lines
Poor / Failing
There is little or no visual difference between any of the lines used to create the sketch, causing visual confusion & uncertainty. Lines are fuzzy or multi-width, there are Gaps or Over Runs at the corners. Lines that should Depict visible edges of the object are missing.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
There is little or no visual difference between some construction lines and final object lines, causing some visual confusion & uncertainty. Lines are fuzzy or multi-width, there are Gaps or Over Runs at the corners. Some Lines that should Depict visible edges of the object are missing.
Basic
All lines depicting visible edges of the object are present; Single Width, and even though they could be darker, they are distinguishable from paper & construction lines. Several inconsistencies in Width and/or Darkness are visible although Most Corners are sharp (90 degrees) with occasional Double Lines, Gaps, or Over-Runs.
Proficient
All lines depicting visible edges of the object are present; Single Width, with minor inconsistencies in Width and/or Darkness although Clearly distinguishable from paper & construction lines. Most Corners are sharp (90 degrees) with some miniscule Gaps, or Over-Runs.
Distinguished
All lines depicting visible edges of the object are present; Single Width, Consistent in Width, Darkness and Clearly distinguishable from paper & construction lines. Corners are sharp (90 degrees) and there is no evidence of Double Lines, Gaps, or Over-Runs. Accurately cover construction lines.
Proportions
Poor / Failing
Overall proportions of the sketch are obviously wrong and there is no visual evidence that attempts were made to reproduce a reasonable representation of the object. Relationships of one part (or Detail element) with others are unrealistic and/or inconsistent throughout the sketch.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
Overall proportions of the sketch are NOT reasonable. Construction lines were drawn to establish proportions but were NOT used. Relationships of one part (or Detail element) with others are unrealistic and/or inconsistent throughout the sketch.
Basic
Overall proportions of the sketch are reasonable. Relationships of one part (or Detail element) with others are unrealistic and/or inconsistent throughout the sketch.
Proficient
Construction Lines show Obvious attempts to establish proportion. Overall proportions of the final sketched object are reasonable in Height-Width-Depth. Relationships of one part (or Detail element) with others are consistent throughout the sketch.
Distinguished
Construction Lines show Obvious attempts to establish proportion. Overall proportions of the final sketched object mirror the original (Height-Width-Depth) and Relationships of one part (or Detail element) with others are realistic and consistent throughout the sketch.
Accuracy / Details
Poor / Failing
View representations are distorted in Shape, Size, and Proportion and change from view to view. Major attributes of the object are missing. There are no details, Sketch includes little more than basic shapes which could have been completed in minimal time.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
Physical Object may be hard to identify when compared to sketch. View sizes change from view to view. Major attributes of the object are included However there are very few identifying details which are often incomplete.
Basic
View sizes are reasonably accurate and consistent. All major attributes of the object are included. There are minimal details which are often incomplete and hurried (eg. square corners instead of rounded )
Proficient
Physical objects are easily Identified by Comparison with the sketch. All but the most minute details are included or labeled. View representations are accurate in Shape, Size, and Proportion.
Distinguished
Physical objects are easily Identified by Comparison with the sketch. Time was obviously dedicated to representing specific, minute details which are all included or labeled. View representations are accurate in Shape, Size, and Proportion.
Clarity / Neatness
Poor / Failing
Sketch is unorganized, too small to see or too large to fit. Text is sloppy and often un-readable. Paper is dirty, has multiple smudges, smears, and/or wrinkles/folds. Final Image is difficult to discern and confusing to viewers.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
Sketch fits on paper, however Text is sloppy and often un-readable. Paper is dirty, has multiple smudges, smears, there are NO wrinkles/folds. Final Image is difficult to discern and confusing to viewers.
Basic
Sketch is organized & fits on paper, but could me made larger or smaller for clarity. Text is sloppy but readable. Paper has multiple erasures, and has been folded in half.
Proficient
Effort is displayed in the Organization, Layout, & Clarity of the sketch. View representations are large enough for clarity, yet could be more appropriately sized for the space available. Printed text is legible & easily read. There are No visible Erasures, Smudges, or Smears, AND Paper has NOT been Folded, Creased or Wrinkled.
Distinguished
Obvious effort is displayed in the Organization, Layout, & Clarity of the sketch. View representations are large enough for clarity, yet No portion of sketch or required information Touches or Extends off of the paper edge. Printed text is legible & easily read. There are No visible Erasures, Smudges, or Smears, AND Paper has NOT been Folded, Creased or Wrinkled.
Shading (Pictorials)
Poor / Failing
There is nothing that represents shading/shadows on the pictorial sketch. Object appears empty, flat and unrealistic.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
The attempt to represent shading is inconsistent and sloppy. Shadows represented are in wrong places and/or cause visual confusion.
Basic
Student utilized a shading technique to accurately represent shadows created from a single light source; shading is sloppy and often incomplete.
Proficient
Student utilized a single shading technique to accurately represent shadows created from a single light source; to represent colors through the values of the shading, And/Or to provide a realistic three dimensional solid appearance.
Distinguished
Student utilized multiple shading techniques to accurately represent shadows created from a single light source; to represent colors through the values of the shading, And/Or to provide a realistic three dimensional solid appearance.
Annotation / Documentation
Poor / Failing
Missing even Basic information such as Name and Title. There are NO annotations or dimensions.
Minimal / Needs Improvement
Basic information such as Name and Title are present. Minimal annotations. No dimensions are included.
Basic
Basic information such as Name and Title are present. Some annotations are present but insufficient to fully communicate necessary information. Missing some dimensions.
Proficient
Sketch includes a Title, Date & Draftsman's/Engineer's Name. Sketch is completely documented utilizing descriptive labels and clarifying text to identify information or details not visually evident. Some Dimensions when used are Missing or not appropriately placed.
Distinguished
Sketch includes a Title, Date & Draftsman's/Engineer's Name. Sketch is completely documented utilizing descriptive labels and clarifying text to identify information or details not visually evident. Dimensions when used are accurate and appropriately placed.
Keywords:
Freehand Sketches Concept Technical Pictorial
Subjects:
Engineering
Types:
Assessment
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More Engineering rubrics
More Assessment rubrics
Do more with this rubric:
Preview
Preview this rubric.
Edit
Modify this rubric.
Copy
Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.
Print
Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize
Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark
Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run
Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade
Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate
Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish
Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email
Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss
Discuss this rubric with other members.
Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.
Only with iRubric
tm
.
Copyright © 2024
Reazon Systems, Inc.
All rights reserved.
n60
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.