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: Robotic Engineering rubric
find rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
(draft)
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Robotic Engineering
Robotic Engineering
This rubric is designed to assess the design of the team's robot.
Rubric Code:
Q358WB
By
tajala
Draft
Public Rubric
Subject:
Science
Type:
Project
Grade Levels:
(none)
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
Robot Design Rubric
Needs Improvement
1 pts
Fair
2 pts
Good
3 pts
Excellent
4 pts
Innovative Design
pts
Needs Improvement
Design, drive train, and structure are standard.
Manipulators/sensors used in expected ways, if used.
Strategy for combining missions expected.
Programming written as expected.
Fair
Design creative, unique use of drive train or structure.
Manipulators/sensors used in unexpected ways, if used.
Unique/creative strategy for coordinating missions.
Programming tasks used in unexpected ways.
(For this category, 1 of the 4 above is demonstrated)
Good
Design creative, uique use of drive train or structure.
Manipulators/sensors used in unexpected ways, if used.
Unique/creative strategy for coodinating missions.
Programming tasks used in unexpected ways.
(For this category, 2 of the 4 above are demonstrated)
Excellent
Design creative, unique use of drive train or structure.
Manipulators/sensors used in unexpected ways, if used.
Unique/creative strategy for coodinating missions.
Programming tasks used in unexpected ways.
(For this category, 1 done exceptionally or 3 of the 4 above demonstrated.)
Strategy, Process, Problem-Solving
pts
Needs Improvement
Uses standard design.
No design process (from initial concept through build, test, refinement) communicated.
Strategy based only on ease of task - did not maximize time, combine mission tasks or consider points.
Fair
Some forethought in initial design.
Refinement of robot and programs not communicated.
Strategy often based on ease of task -few risks taken.
Some consideration of time, mission combinations or maximizing points.
Good
Basic understanding of design process, evidence of conceptual planning, building, testing, refining of robot, manipulators, programs.
Effective strategic planning, combining mission tasks, plotting routes, using manipulators and/or program slots.
Excellent
Communicates complete design process, from initial concept through build, test, and refinement.
Excellent/innovative strategy, combining mission tasks, plotting routes, maximizing points.
Locomotion & Navigation
pts
Needs Improvement
Difficulty going same distance on repeated missions.
Too fast for accuracy, or too slow to accomplish mission.
Turns inaccurate or inconsistent.
Moves between tow points inconsistently.
No effort to know position on table beyond distance and accurate turns.
Fair
Goes defined distances sometimes.
Turns sometimes accurate.
Sometimes moves between tow points consistently.
Little or no effort to know position on table beyond distance and accurate turns.
Good
Goes defined distances most of the time.
Not too fast for accuracy or too slow to accomplish mission.
Turns reasonabley accurate and consistent.
Allows for variables.
Moves between two points with reasonable accuracy and consistency.
May use various sensors.
Excellent
Goes defined distances efficiently.
Adjusts speed, position sensing for optimum speed and accuracy.
Turns accurately and consistently.
Allows for variables (battery wear, obstacles).
Moves between tow points with very good accuracy and consistency.
May use various sensors.
Programming
pts
Needs Improvement
Programs disorganized
Programs inefficient
Results unpredictable
Sensors inadequately used.
Programs do not accomplish expected tasks.
Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions defined but unused.
Student can't describe what run will do.
Fair
Programs somewhat organized
Programs efficient at completing some tasks.
Results somewhat unpredictable
Programs do some of what is expected
Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions, if used, not understood.
Good
Programs organized.
Programs efficient at completing most tasks.
Programs do what they're expected to do.
Sensors used effectively, if used.
Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions, if used, are needed.
Kids can describe most of mission.
Excellent
Programs logically organized.
Programs very efficient.
Programs always work, even for complex tasks.
Sensors, if used, guarantee certain actions in every trial.
Programs work in competition as in practice.
Variables, loops, subroutines and conditions, if used, are effective.
Children can describe mission and reference the program.
Student Does the Work
pts
Needs Improvement
Little knowledge of why some parts are located as they are on the robot.
Little or no understanding of what pieces did.
Building/programming appears primarily done by coach.
Fair
Knowledge of robot structure and programming shows minimal understanding of underlying design, science, and technology (age specific expectations).
Building and programming seems primarily directed by coach.
Good
Knowledge of robot structure and programming shows moderate understanding of underlying desing, science, and technology (ae specific expectations).
Building/programming mostly directed by team members, with help from coach.
Excellent
Knowledge of robot structure and programming shows thorough understanding of underlying design, science, and technology (age specific expectations).
Building/programming was done by team memebers.
Structural
pts
Needs Improvement
Difficulty with robot assembly during demo.
Base weak, falls apart when handled or run.
Attachments, if used, weak and fall apart often; difficulty completing task; or overly complex. Robot design from book, little modification by team.
Fair
Robot assembly done with few errors.
Robot base structure has some stabliity.
Attachments, if used, difficult to apply; and /or not modular; not precise or not repeatable.
Robot show signs of team's design ideas.
Good
Slow robot assembly, with no errors
Robot base stable, but not robust.
Attachments, if used, modular; function most of the time; and/or take some time to assemble; somewhat precese and /or repeatable.
Robot designed by team.
Excellent
Robot assembles easily.
Robot base stable and robust.
Attachments, if used, modular, function as expected and easily added/removed from robot. Robot displays wide range of capabilities.
Attachments, if used, performtasks extremely well and are repeatable.
Robot designed by team; design is unique and creative.
Overall Design
pts
Needs Improvement
Robots lack most critical design components: works, stays together, efficient parts use, attachments easy to add/remove, simpler than comparable robots.
Few components work together; few components look like they belong together.
Fair
Robot lacks many critical design components: works, stays together, efficient parts use, attachments easy to add/remove, simpler than comparable robots.
Some components work together; some components look like they belong together.
Good
Robot lacks some critical design components: works, stays together, efficient parts use attachments easy to add/remove, simpler than comparable robots.
Most components work together; most compenents look like they belong together.
Excellent
Robot is elegant, complete system.
All components work well together.
All components look like they belong together.
Troubleshooting.
pts
Needs Improvement
None
Fair
Recognizes, attempts with little or no success.
Good
Can perform troubleshooting most of the time. Moderate success getting robot to achieve attempted objectives.
Excellent
Always performs troubleshooting without being asked. Works on robotic design, programming and features until objectives are achieved.
Special Events
pts
Needs Improvement
None or very little.
Fair
Is aware of events; attends some, but very few. Little or no participation when attending.
Good
Attends moderate amount of special events.Usually asked to attend. Some participation; fair showing when competing.
Excellent
Seeks opportunities. Not only attends, but participates. Excells in competitive events.
Leadership
pts
Needs Improvement
None; detracts from unity and excellence.
Fair
Very little. Is cooperative and offers some ideas in group settings.
Good
Can be a good leader. Is cooperative and occasionally helps others in group setting.
Excellent
Excellent leader. Clearly leads team and in group settings with all aspects of robot construction, programming and achievement of objectives. Neutralizes disagreements and compromises when appropriate.
Resources
pts
Needs Improvement
Fair
Usually reads and uses general and basic resources available.
Good
Reads and uses general resources. Will seek outside resources and information when prompted or provided.
Excellent
Almost always seeks outside resources. Books, internet sites/searches, other software are consulted frequently.
Enter Title
pts
Needs Improvement
Fair
Good
Excellent
Keywords:
Robot Design
Subjects:
Science
Types:
Project
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More Science rubrics
More Project 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
This rubric is still in draft mode and cannot be scored. Please change the rubric status to
ready to use
.
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.