Skip to main content

iRubric: Community Gardener Portrait (Oral History Project) rubric

(draft) edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Community Gardener Portrait (Oral History Project) Oral History Project Students will be partnered with a gardener who will function as mentor. Students will interview and get to know this person in order to write a portrait of who they are and why they engage in community gardening. Stories and anecdotes people share about their hobbies and practices are extremely valuable to the understanding of larger food-based social movements of which we are a part. Rubric Code: TX8W9C2 By ClaudiaH Draft Public Rubric Subject: Humanities Type: Assignment Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Oral History Project
	Excellent 4 pts	Great 3 pts	Good 2 pts	Improvement Needed 1 pts	Does Not Meet Requirements 0 pts
Preparation/Interview Questions	Excellent Interview Questions are typed and included in appendix page. There are at least 5 interview questions; all are open ended and are well worded and thought out.	Great Interview Questions are typed and included in appendix page. There are at least 4 interview questions; most are open ended and are mostly well worded and thought out.	Good Interview Questions are typed and are included in paper, but not necessarily in appendix page. There are at least 3 interview questions, they are mostly open ended show some thought.	Improvement Needed Interview Questions are typed and are included in paper, but not necessarily in appendix page. There are at least 2 interview questions, only one question is open ended and shows some thought.	Does Not Meet Requirements Interview Questions are not included in paper or in appendix page. There is only 1 interview questions or none (0), the question is not open ended and shows no thought.
Interview	Excellent Student completed a face-to-face interview in a timely manner. Student also conducted follow up interview & consulted mentor to ensure accuracy of information collected.	Great Student completed a face-to-face interview in a timely manner. Student did not conduct follow up interviews, but did consult mentor to ensure accuracy of information collected.	Good Student completed an email interview in a timely manner. Student did not conduct follow up interviews, but did consult mentor to ensure accuracy of information collected.	Improvement Needed Student completed a late email interview. Student did not conduct follow up interviews nor consult mentor to ensure accuracy of information collected.	Does Not Meet Requirements Student did not completed an interview by the due date or ever.
Documentation of Interview	Excellent If documentation of interview was allowed by gardener mentor, it was done using high quality photographs, video or audio recording devices. These images are included in the paper in a manner that supports the narrative.	Great If documentation of interview was allowed by gardener mentor, it was done using good quality photographs, video or audio recording devices. These images are included in the paper in a manner that mostly supports the narrative.	Good If documentation of interview was allowed by gardener mentor, it was done using okay to tolerable quality photographs, video or audio recording devices. These images are included in the paper in a manner that somewhat supports the narrative.	Improvement Needed If documentation of interview was allowed by gardener mentor, it was done using poor quality photographs, video or audio recording devices. These images are not included in the paper in a manner that supports the narrative.	Does Not Meet Requirements Student did not submit documentation of interview.
Check-in Requirements	Excellent Student turned in complete draft by the due date and gave a well organized presentation of their work by the required date.	Great Student turned in a mostly complete draft by the due date and gave a mostly well organized presentation of their work by the required date.	Good Student completed interview in a timely manner; turned in a somewhat complete draft and presented a somewhat well organized presentation of their work by the required date.	Improvement Needed Student did not complete interview in a timely manner; turned in an outline or jottings rather than a complete draft and they gave a disorganized presentation of their work on the required date.	Does Not Meet Requirements Student did not complete interview in a timely manner or at all; turned in an outline or jottings rather than a complete draft and they did not give a presentation of their work on the required date.
Final Product	Excellent Introduction is concise, effective, original and appropriate. Significant editing is demonstrated between text and Q/A, early draft. Text retains strong voice of interviewee. Text focuses on guiding question. Text details significance as well as concrete details.	Great Introduction is concise, effective, original and appropriate. Significant editing is demonstrated between text and Q/A, early draft. Text retains strong voice of interviewee. Text focuses on guiding question. Text details significance as well as concrete details.	Good Product represents learning; however, it lacks careful thought, creativity, time, and effort for maximum effectiveness.	Improvement Needed Poorly created product that does not fully represent the possible learning opportunity.	Does Not Meet Requirements Not applicable since product was not turned in.
Concluding thoughts	Excellent Student concludes the narrative with a reflection of what they learned from their gardener mentor and/or how this gardener mentor's narrative reflects social, cultural or global concerns.	Great Student concludes the narrative with a reflection of what they learned from their gardener mentor and/or how this gardener mentor's narrative reflects social, cultural or global concerns.	Good Student concludes the narrative with a reflection of what they learned from their gardener mentor and attempts to make connections between the gardener mentor's narrative and social, cultural or global concerns.	Improvement Needed Student concludes the narrative with a reflection of what they learned from their gardener mentor but does not make connections between the gardener mentor's narrative and social, cultural or global concerns.	Does Not Meet Requirements Student does not conclude with a reflection of any kind.
Spelling & Grammar	Excellent Writing is flawless; no typos, spelling, mechanical, grammar errors. Proper sentence structure is used. Paragraphs are 4-6 sentences long, no more no less. Paper has title.	Great Writing is mostly flawless; few typos, spelling, mechanical, grammar errors. Proper sentence structure is used. Paragraphs are inconsistent in length. Paper lacks title.	Good Writing contains flaws; several typos, spelling, mechanical, grammar errors. Proper sentence structure is somewhat consistent. Paragraphs are inconsistent in length. Paper lacks title.	Improvement Needed Writing is riddled with flaws; many typos, spelling, mechanical, grammar errors. Proper sentence structure is not used. Paragraphs are too long. Paper lacks title.	Does Not Meet Requirements Writing is poorly written and hard to read or incomplete. Proper sentence structure is not used. Paragraphs are too long. Paper lacks title.
Citation	Excellent Text meets word guidelines. The works cited page is in MLA format. Garden mentor is included in citation.	Great Text falls short of word guidelines. The works cited page is included but has some formatting mistakes. Garden mentor is included in citation.	Good The works cited page is turned in but not in correct format. Garden mentor is included in citation, but cited incorrectly.	Improvement Needed The information is cited but not on a separate page. Garden mentor is included in citation, but cited incorrectly.	Does Not Meet Requirements Multiple problems with citation but does not fall under plagiarism. Garden mentor is not included in citation. *If it is deemed that the student plagiarized, the school's discipline policy will be enforced.
Follow-Up	Excellent Students will submit all artifacts and/or original material, along with a sincere Thank You card and note. All or nothing on this one. Either 100% or a zero.	Great	Good	Improvement Needed	Does Not Meet Requirements Students will submit all artifacts and/or original material, along with a sincere Thank You card and note. All or nothing on this one. Either 100% or a zero.

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More English 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

This rubric is still in draft mode and cannot be scored. Please change the rubric status to ready to use.

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.

n202