- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: Shoebox habitat diorama rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Shoebox habitat diorama Rubric Code: MXBBXB By tizrok22 Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Science Type: Project Grade Levels: K-5

Shoebox habitat diorama Enter rubric description
	Poor 0 pts	Fair 2.5 pts	Good 5 pts
Group work Each member of the group is required to participate by coming up with at least 1 item that is found in their animals habitat.	Poor 1 or 2 members of the group comes up with something found in their animals habitat.	Fair 3 members of the group comes up with something found in their animals habitat.	Good All 4 members of the group comes up with something found in their animals habitat.
Materials Materials that were supplied to each group are used.	Poor 1-2 materials supplied to each group were used.	Fair 3-4 materials supplied to each group were used.	Good 5 or more materials supplied to each group were used.
Accuracy of habitat Project should contain at least 5 items that would be found in the habitat of assigned ocean animal.	Poor The project contains 1-2 items that would be found in assigned ocean animal habitat.	Fair The project contains 3-4 items that would be found in assigned ocean animal habitat.	Good The project contains 5 or more items that would be found in assigned ocean animal habitat.
Labeling of habitat Project should have the name of each member of the group on the outside of the shoe box and should contain at least 5 items that are appropriate for that animal that are labeled using inventive spelling.	Poor Names of group members are not on the shoe box and there are 1-2 items that are labeled using inventive spelling.	Fair Names of group members are on the shoe box and there are 3-4 items that are labeled using inventive spelling.	Good Names of group members are on the shoe box and there are 5 or more items that are labeled using inventive spelling.
Quality of work completed project is clean and neat. Pictures and/or drawings are easy to understand.	Poor None of the project is clean and neat. Details and/or drawings are difficult to read or understand.	Fair Half of the project is clean and neat. Half of the details and/or drawings are easy to understand.	Good All of the project is clean and neat. All details and/or drawings project easy to understand.