Skip to main content
iRubric: Adventure Story rubric

iRubric: Adventure Story rubric

find rubric

(draft) edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Adventure Story 
Adventure Story
Students were asked to write a short action story.
Rubric Code: Z256W8
By ODoherty
Draft
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: (none)

Powered by iRubric Adventure Story
  Excellent

4 pts

Good

3 pts

Fair

2 pts

Poor

1 pts

Needs Improvement

0 pts

Plot/Events

Excellent

The story events show a definite and logical sequence.
Good

The story events are included, but are not necessarily entirely clear to the reader.
Fair

There are story events but they do not necessarily demonstate a flow.
Poor

There are story events but they lack elaboration.
Needs Improvement

There is no evidence of a specific plot and/or events.
Problem/Solution

Excellent

The story events show a definite problem and solution.
Good

The story events show evidence of a problem and solution, but are not necessarily as clear to the reader as they could have been.
Fair

The story events show evidence of a problem or solution.
Poor

The story events show a small attempt at a problem or solution.
Needs Improvement

There is no evidence of a definite problem and/or solution.
Dialogue/Exact Words

Excellent

The story includes logical dialogue for the characters and is punctuated correctly.
Good

The story includes logical dialogue which has minimal punctuation errors.
Fair

The story includes logical dialogue which has many punctuation errors.
Poor

There is minimal dialogue and it is not punctuated correctly.
Needs Improvement

There is no evidence of dialogue and/or exact words.
Snapshots/Show Us Don't Tell Us

Excellent

The author creates definite and consistent pictures throughout the story using strong voice (adjectives and verbs).
Good

The author includes a few attempts to paint pictures throughout the story using strong voice (adjectives and verbs).
Fair

The author attempts to paint pictures throughout the story, although they may use basic vocabulary to do so.
Poor

The author includes at least one attempt to paint pictures throughout the story although they may use basic vocabulary to do so.
Needs Improvement

The author did not "paint pictures" ie.: show us, instead of "telling us" the story.
Catchy Title

Excellent

The author's title was very catchy (interesting), and enticed the reader to want to know more.
Good

The author's title was somewhat interesting.
Fair

The author included a basic title.
Poor
Needs Improvement
Accurate Spelling

Excellent

It was obvious to the reader that spelling was carefully checked before final submission of the piece.
Good

It appreared to the reader that spelling was checked before final submission of the piece, although there may still have been minimal errors.
Fair

It appreared to the reader that spelling was checked before final submission of the piece, although there may still have been several errors.
Poor

There were numerous spelling errors throughout the piece.
Needs Improvement

It was obvious to the reader that spelling was not checked before final submission.
Accurate Punctuation

Excellent

It was obvious to the reader that punctuation was carefully checked before final submission of the piece.
Good

It appreared to the reader that punctation was checked before final submission of the piece, although there may still have been minimal errors.
Fair

It appreared to the reader that punctuation was checked before final submission of the piece, although there may still have been several errors.
Poor

There were numerous punctuation errors throughout the piece.
Needs Improvement

It was obvious to the reader that punctuation was not checked before final submission.
Accurate Capitalization

Excellent

It was obvious to the reader that capitalization was carefully checked before final submission of the piece.
Good

It appreared to the reader that capitalization was checked before final submission of the piece, although there may still have been minimal errors.
Fair

It appreared to the reader that capitalization was checked before final submission of the piece, although there may still have been several errors.
Poor

There were numerous capitalization errors throughout the piece.
Needs Improvement

It was obvious to the reader that capitalization was not checked before final submission.
Neatness

Excellent

The quality of neatness strongly indicates that the author used the alotted time wisely and took pride in the final submission.
Good

The quality of neatness moderately indicates that the author used the alotted time wisely and took pride in the final submission.
Fair

The quality of neatness mildly indicates that the author used the alotted time wisely and took pride in the final submission.
Poor

The quality of neatness indicates that the author may not have used the alotted time wisely, and but took some pride in the final submission.
Needs Improvement

The quality of neatness does not indicate that the author did not use the alotted time wisely and thus did not take pride in the final submission.




Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




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 iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n60