Skip to main content

iRubric: Mouse Trap Vehicle Report rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Mouse Trap Vehicle Report Mouse Trap Vehicle Report Rubric Code: L3586A By tajala Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Engineering Type: Assignment Grade Levels: (none)

Mouse Trap Vehicle Report Enter rubric description
	Poor 1 pts	Fair 2 pts	Good 3 pts
Title Page 1 pts Enter criteria description	Poor 60% or more of the components necessary for a complete title page exist.	Fair 80% or more of the components necessary for a complete title page exist.	Good All components required for the title page exist and are located correctly.
Abstract 2 pts Enter criteria description	Poor Does not completely explain the report in a concise manner. Purpose and objective of the work are unclear.	Fair Does not completely explain the report in a concise manner. Purpose of the work is stated.	Good Approximately one paragraph. Tells detailed information about the report. Contains objectives of the work.
Table of Contents 1 pts Enter criteria description	Poor Table of contents exists. But page numbers and sections are missing or inaccurate.	Fair Table of contents exists but is missing page numbers or sections that are required.	Good Table of contents exists with page numbers and all required sections of the report listed.
Introduction 2 pts	Poor Is wordy or lacking information. Material is not related to what is in the report.	Fair Is either wordy, lacking information or not related to the material in the report.	Good Short brief explanation of the activity is complete and accurate.
Brainstorming 1 pts	Poor Less than 5 rainstorming ideas given or discussed.	Fair Brainstorming ideas are provided, but not discussed.	Good Brainstorming ideas provided and fully described / discussed.
Design Selection 3 pts	Poor Design is discussed, but why it was chosen is not.	Fair Design is given. Little or no discussion provided for why or how design was selected / developed. Little or no discussion of main feature of the design.	Good Design is fully described. Good description of selection process from brainstorming ideas. Main feature fully described.
Construction Process 2 pts	Poor How the construction of the vehicle compared to the design not discussed.	Fair Description of construction process provided, but no analysis of how the construction effected the vehicle's performance given.	Good Detailed description of construction process given. Analysis of how construction enhanced or detracted from vehicle performance is provided.
Competition Performance 2 pts	Poor Minimal information provided on competition.	Fair Competiton rankings are briefly discussed. Little reasoning for rankings given.	Good Competition ranks given and detailed reasoning for vehicle performance provided.
Vehicle improvements 2 pts	Poor Very short description of possible improvements provided with no engineering reasoning.	Fair Vehicle faults are described. Short list of improvements and recommendations are given. Little reasoning for improvements given.	Good Vehicle faults are described. Improvements and recommendations for vehicle design are fully described and explained. Reasoning for improvements are fully detailed.
Materials 1 pts	Poor Not all materials for project are not listed.	Fair Design materials are given.	Good Design materials are given and reasoning for material usage is discussed.
Conclusion 2 pts	Poor Student has a summary that does not match the work in the activity.	Fair Summary is too long or does not explain what the student accomplished.	Good Student has a summary of what he/she learned and what the activity was all about.
Appendix 3 pts	Poor Drawings and Schematics are just thrown in the back, are not labeled or do not exist.	Fair Appendix holds information that does not belong. Appendix is labeled incorrectly.	Good All large pieces of information are in an appendix. Each appendix is labeled and holds information such as schematics, and drawings.
Citations 1 pts	Poor Few sources that were used are cited and the format has not been followed.	Fair Some of the sources the student used are not cited and are not formatted correctly.	Good All information gathered by the student has been cited with the proper format.
Written Report Format 2 pts	Poor Report has many mistakes in grammar and spelling with no evidence of proof reading. Font size and margins are inappropriately used. Pronouns were used freely throughout the report.	Fair Report has a few mistakes in grammar and spelling. Report is typed, but has some areas where fonts are excessively large or small. A few pronouns were used.	Good Report was written in professional manner with no personal pronouns and appropriate grammer, spelling, and evidence of proof reading. Report is typed neatly with appropriate fonts and margins.

Subjects:

Engineering

Types:

Assignment

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More Engineering rubrics

More Assignment 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