|
Beginning
1
|
Developing
2
|
Accomplished
3
|
Exemplary
4
|
Score
|
|
Data Analysis
|
Analysis unrelated, prediction not supported.
|
Analysis somewhat related, prediction slightly supported.
|
Analysis relevant.
|
Analysis directly relevant. A clear connection between the data analysis
and predicted snowfall is made.
|
15 |
|
Organization
|
Not organized, analysis makes no sense. Analysis not related to
poster (graph) or data.
|
Some organization, analysis jumps around, start and end are unclear.
|
Organized per project instructions, analysis is somewhat jumpy.
|
Good organization, analysis is logically ordered, all project instructions
followed.
|
25 |
|
Quality of Information
|
Unable to find specific details. Source of data not identified. Analysis incomplete
|
Details are somewhat sketchy.
|
Some details are non-supporting to the analysis or prediction.
|
Supporting details are specific to the subject. Analysis clearly explains
meaning of poster (graph).
|
15 |
|
Grammar & Spelling
|
Very frequent grammar and/or spelling errors.
|
More than two errors.
|
Only one or two errors.
|
All grammar and spelling are correct.
|
5 |
|
Interest Level of Poster
|
Needs descriptive words.
|
Summary is plain, details lack meaning and interest.
|
Summary is varied, supporting details need work.
|
Summary captures meaning of the analysis, supporting details vivid.
|
10 |
|
Neatness
|
Illegible writing, loose pages, graph not well presented.
|
Legible writing, some ill-formed letters, print too small or too
large, graph hard to read, axes not straight, points not clear.
|
Legible writing, well-formed characters, graph clean and neatly
prepared and suitable for display.
|
Very neat report, graph and analysis suitable for side by
side display.
|
20 |
|
Timeliness
|
Project handed in more than one day late
|
One day late
|
On time.
|
On time.
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
Total
|
100 |