Skip to main content

iRubric: Vanity Tag Rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Vanity Tag Rubric 
Rubric used as part of character analysis.
Rubric Code: MX6AW99
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Attendance  
Grade Levels: 9-12

Powered by iRubric Vanity Tag Rubric
  Poor

2 pts

Fair

3 pts

Good

5 pts

Format

The vanity tag must have the character name, city and year of registration placed appropriately.

Poor

The character name, city and year of registration are not found on the vanity tag--OR--one or more of these items is incorrect or missing.
Fair

The character name, city and year of registration may be on the vanity tag, but they are not in the correct place or in the wrong order.
Good

The character name is centered on top of the tag and the city and year of registration are centered on the bottom of the tag, underneath the moniker created.
Moniker & Support

The moniker must be an appropriate one for the character and in the appropriate place on the tag. The passages selected must clearly support the moniker, must be in placed according to directions (or special permission) and must include the line numbers.

Poor

A moniker has been created, but the supporting passages do not provide support for the nickname. The passages have not been cited correctly (the line numbers have not been included).----OR--there are no supporting passages.
Fair

A moniker has been created, but the supporting passages provide weak support. The passages have been cited correctly (the line numbers have been given at the end of each passage).
Good

A moniker has been created which strongly reveals the personality of the character. The passages selected provide strong support and have been cited correctly (the line numbers have been given at the end of each passage).
Workmanship

The vanity tag must be neat, creative and visually appealing. The student should submit a rough draft which shows that the product was well-thought out and planned.

Poor

The vanity tag is not visually appealing. The moniker has not been placed in the center of the tag. Artwork or illustrations included as part of the design do not fit the nature of the client or the moniker. (Putting a flowery vine all around the borders of the tag, for example.) There has been no attempt to create an attractive vanity tag. The writing is illegible because of its small size or spelling errors. No rough draft has been provided--or it is incomplete.
Fair

The vanity tag looks fine. the moniker is centered on the tag. All elements have been correctly placed. All handwriting is legible. Minimal effort has been made to create a vanity tag, but the tag lacks creativity and is not visually appealing. A rough draft has been included, but there is no evidence of revision.
Good

The vanity tag is neat, creative, and visually appealing. The moniker is centered on the tag. Any additional art/illustrations help to accentuate the nature of the character for whom this tag has been created. All writing is legible. A rough draft has been included, and it is clear that changes have been made (there is evidence of revisions).
Oral Presentation

The student must present the vanity tag to the client, explaining why the moniker was chosen. The student must also answer any questions which the client may have, using textual evidence to back up all claims and inferences made.

Poor

The student introduces him/herself, shows the vanity tag and just reads what is on it. The student does not refer to the text to explain his/her design choices or to provide support for any conclusions reached. The student makes no attempt to answer client questions and mumbles throughout the presentation. The student may also use the incorrect word.
Fair

The student introduces him/herself, shows the vanity tag and explains the rationale behind the moniker, but relies mostly on the character's actions or interactions with others to explain design choices. The student speaks clearly and loudly through most of the presentation, but may occasionally be too soft or use an incorrect word.
Good

The student introduces him/herself and explains the rationale behind the moniker, using examples of the character's thoughts, actions, words, and interactions with others to explain design choices. The student speaks loudly and clearly throughout the presentation and makes correct word choices.



Keywords:
  • Character analysis

Subjects:

Types:





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 iRubrictm.

n178