Example Rubrics

Example Analytic Rubric

Criteria	Rating
Criteria	Fully meets criteria	Meets some criteria	Meets few criteria
Conveys relevant scientific concepts	Accurately represents the relevant scientific concepts completely and without errors. Concepts are completely fleshed out.	Some concepts include misconceptions, errors, or omissions.	Several conceptual errors or missing points.
Illustrates the experimental design	Hypothesis is clear and testable. Experimental treatments include relevant controls. Purpose of controls is clearly explained.	Hypothesis over- or under-states what the experiment tests. Explanation of treatments and controls includes some misconceptions, errors, or omissions.	Hypothesis is not included, unclear, or not what was tested. No controls were included in experimental design. Explanation of treatments and controls was incorrect or missing entirely.
Uses evidence effectively to support arguments	Results section concisely summarizes findings outlined in the experimental design. Conclusions connect results with the hypothesis, provide an interpretation of the results, and propose future experiments. Experimental limitations are addressed.	Results section is complete but includes elements from other sections (e.g., conclusions); or some findings are missing or unclear. Conclusions section only partially interprets the results. Experimental limitations are not fully addressed.	Results and conclusions sections are conflated with each other, missing key elements, or inaccurate. Conclusions do not explain limitations of the results or future directions.
Meets format guidelines and is organized	Uses 11- or 12-point font, 1" margins, Arial or Times font. Less than 3 pages. Sections are clearly labeled and transition smoothly from one to the next. Overall document is organized and easy to read.	Document meets several criteria but needs better organization with respect to readability or formatting. Occasional errors.	Document is difficult to follow or includes several errors or omissions.
Demonstrates experimental relevance	Connects the experiment with scientific or cultural relevance. Explains whether and how this experiment and its results matter. Demonstrates how the discovery advances the field.	Explanations are included but connection/relevance is vague.	No explanations are included with respect to relevance, connection to hypothesis, or discovery.

Example Holistic Rubric

9 – 10 points	5 – 8 points	0 – 4 points
Accurately represents the relevant scientific concepts completely and without errors. Concepts are completely fleshed out. Hypothesis is clear and testable. Experimental treatments include relevant controls. Purpose of controls is clearly explained. Results section concisely summarizes findings outlined in the experimental design. Conclusions connect results with the hypothesis, provide an interpretation of the results, and propose future experiments. Experimental limitations are addressed. Uses 11- or 12-point font, 1" margins, Arial or Times font. Less than 3 pages. Sections are clearly labeled and transition smoothly from one to the next. Overall document is organized and easy to read. Connects the experiment with scientific or cultural relevance. Explains whether and how this experiment and its results matter. Demonstrates how the discovery advances the field.	Some concepts include misconceptions, errors, or omissions. Hypothesis over- or under-states what the experiment tests. Explanation of treatments and controls includes some misconceptions, errors, or omissions. Results section is complete but includes elements from other sections (e.g., conclusions); or some findings are missing or unclear. Conclusions section only partially interprets the results. Experimental limitations are not fully addressed. Document meets several criteria but needs better organization with respect to readability or formatting. Occasional errors. Explanations are included but connection/relevance is vague.	Several conceptual errors or missing points. Hypothesis is not included, unclear, or not what was tested. No controls were included in experimental design. Explanation of treatments and controls was incorrect or missing entirely. Results and conclusions sections are conflated with each other, missing key elements, or inaccurate. Conclusions do not explain limitations of the results or future directions. Document is difficult to follow or includes several errors or omissions. No explanations are included with respect to relevance, connection to hypothesis, or discovery.