Skip to main content

iRubric: Q&A Final Project rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Q&A Final Project IMAGINARY HISTORICAL INTERVIEW The student is to conduct an interview (Q & A format) with a person who is associated with the Morgan State University campus as either an instructor, alum or employee. The student must ask at least 15 questions. The student is to write a brief introduction explaining who the subject is and what the subject's significance is. The student will produce a written piece with their questions in bold and the subject's answers in regular typeface. Rubric Code: H762WX By mkent5 Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Communication Type: Project Grade Levels: Undergraduate

INTERVIEW
	Poor 1 pts	Fair 2 pts	Average 3 pts	Good 4 pts	Excellent 5 pts
INTRODUCTION	Poor The writer does not introduce the subject and the area of the interview before going directly into the questions.	Fair The writer just barely introduces the subject and the interview topic.	Average The writer leaves out a few important details about the subject and what the interview will be about.	Good Only a detail or two about the subject is omitted and the writer does a better than average job of introducing the topic of the interview.	Excellent The writer succinctly, but thoroughly introduces who the interview subject is and what the interview will be about.
QUALITY OF QUESTIONS	Poor The questions are poorly constructed and elicit very little in the way of useful information. More than a few questions are closed ended and bring little more than yes or no answers.	Fair The questions are occasionally well constructed, but do little to elicit any insight from the subject.	Average The questions are generally focused, though occasionally stray from serious or insightful topics.	Good The questions are usually focused and mostly produce topical and interesting answers.	Excellent The questions are respectful, but probing and elicit consistently fascinating answers. The interviewer asks broad and insightful questions that engage the subject and make the reader think.
CONTENT AND INTERVIEW SUBJECT	Poor The interview reads/sounds more like a casual conversation rather than a serious interview of a person of substance. The interview subject has little to offer in terms of depth.	Fair The interview is slightly more than casual, but still seems more friendly than journalistic.	Average The interview has some moments where the interviewer and subject are engaged in a dialogue that might not be entirely casual.	Good The interview is respectful, but occasionally pointed as interviewer occasionally is willing to ask polite, but confrontational questions.	Excellent The interview is respectful, but the interviewer is not afraid to challenge the subject with questions that require answers with depth or reveal a perspective that is different than that of the interviewer.
FOLLOWING UP AND LISTENING	Poor The interviewer gives little or no evidence of listening, but rather appears to march through prepared questions without regard to responses.	Fair The interviewer gives little evidence of careful listening by largely ignoring potentially relevant responses and moving on to the next question.	Average The interviewer demonstrates a slight level of attentiveness by interjecting a few follow up questions to responses that may have greater significance.	Good The interviewer largely pursues reasonable areas of follow-up, but misses at least one area of potential area for elaboration.	Excellent The interviewer acutely listens to what the subject says, and follows up all angles for elaboration. The interviewer appears willing to forgo a prepared list of questions to follow the subject's answers.
INTERVIEW FLOW AND ORGANIZATION	Poor Questions and comments seem to be randomly arranged	Fair The interview is a little hard to follow. The transitions are sometimes not clear.	Average Most of the story is related to the chosen subject. The story wanders off at one point, but the reader can still learn something about the subject.	Good The story is pretty well organized. One idea or scene may seem out of place. Clear transitions are used.	Excellent The entire interview is related to the chosen subject and allows the reader to understand much more about the subject.
ACCURACY	Poor Errors in accuracy make the story very hard to comprehend.	Fair There are several factual errors in the story.	Average Most facts presented in the story are accurate (at least 70%).	Good Almost all facts presented in the story are accurate.	Excellent All facts presented in the story are accurate.
LENGTH	Poor Interview is of insufficient length, either running far too long or with not nearly enough questions.	Fair Interview is just shorter than required length or runs overly longer than necessary without adding any additional information.	Average Interview meets the bare minimum required questions and is of adequate length.	Good Interview is of a good length with sufficient number of questions posed, and answers of sufficient length.	Excellent Interview is of a superior length with 15 or more questions and answers of superior length.
DETAIL	Poor The interviewer leaves it to the reader to guess or know what the subject is talking about and provides no context or explanation.	Fair The interviewer provides only a bare amount of context or explanation for a subject's answer.	Average The interviewer provides or asks for a minimum amount of explanation.	Good The interviewer leaves only a few answers to interpretation and provides a good amount of context.	Excellent The interviewer does an exceptional job of getting a subject to fully flesh out his/her answers, so the reader feels fully a part of the interview.
MECHANICS x 2	Poor Significant spelling and grammatical errors make the article unacceptable. There are significant problems with subject-verb agreement.	Fair Grammar and writing mistakes make the article hard to follow or comprehend. There are frequent problems with subject-verb agreement.	Average Some grammar, spelling and writing mistakes are present. There are some problems with subject-verb agreement.	Good There are relatively few grammatical or spelling mistakes. There are relatively few subject-verb disagreements.	Excellent The article is free of grammatical and spelling errors. There are no problems with subject-verb agreements.

Subjects:

Communication

Types:

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More Communication rubrics

More Project rubrics

Do more with this rubric:

Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.

Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.

Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.

Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.

Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.

Assess

Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.

Share

Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.

Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubric^tm.

n178