Skip to main content

RCampus ePortfolios

iRubric: W200 - Spring 2010 - E-portfolio Draft rubric

iRubric: W200 - Spring 2010 - E-portfolio Draft rubric


edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
W200 - Spring 2010 - E-portfolio Draft 
Rubric for e-portfolio draft assignment
Rubric Code: Q48AX
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Education  
Type: ePortfolio  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Home and About Me Pages
Criteria for the content and appearance of Home and About Me pages
  Poor

2 pts

Fair

3 pts

Good

4 pts

Excellent

5 pts

Home Page
2 pts

Poor

Three of the qualities listed in the excellent column are missing.
Fair

Two of the qualities listed in the excellent column are missing.
Good

One of the qualities listed in the excellent column is missing.
Excellent

Invites the reader to view the portfolio (2). Has something of visual appeal to make the portfolio enticing (2). Explains to the reader what they can expect to find (3). Sounds genuine and individual, not like a cookie-cutter job (3).
About Me Page
2 pts

Poor

Three of the qualities listed in the excellent column are missing.
Fair

Two of the qualities listed in the excellent column are missing.
Good

One of the qualities listed in the excellent column is missing.
Excellent

Information on page is primarily professional (things someone hiring you would want to know) (2). A professional picture of you in included (2). Your attitudes/beliefs about technology in education can be found (3). Sounds genuine and individual, not like a cookie-cutter job (3).
Gallery
  Poor

2 pts

Fair

3 pts

Good

4 pts

Excellent

5 pts

Explanations
1 pts

Poor

The explanations are missing or poorly written for most of the gallery items.
Fair

Explanations for some of the gallery items are vague. Does not describe both technology itself and its educational merits. Linkage between the items and the subject area is not well established.
Good

Explanations of gallery items thoroughly explain both the technology itself and its educational merits. Linkage between the items and the subject area is not well established.
Excellent

Explanations of gallery items thoroughly explain both the technology itself and its educational merits. Explanations are also well aligned with the subject area.
Quality and Quantity
1 pts

Poor

The gallery includes only few items; it does not reflect variety. Quality does not convey a high level of technological ability and achievement.
Fair

The page includes a fair number of technological projects. The quality and quantity of the projects in the gallery convey an average level of technological ability and achievement.
Good

The page as a whole is a good showcase. It "wow's" the viewer with the listed technological projects. The quality and the projects in the gallery convey a high level of technological ability and achievement. The page is only missing the variety (quantity).
Excellent

The page as a whole is a true gallery; a showcase. It "wow's" the viewer with a variety of technological projects. The quality and quantity of the projects in the gallery convey a high level of technological ability and achievement.
Functionality and Organization
Criteria for functionality and organization of the e-portfolio
  Poor

2 pts

Fair

3 pts

Good

4 pts

Excellent

5 pts

Functionality
1 pts

Poor

Several links are broken or several objects are not publicly viewable.
Fair

There are two broken links or unpublished objects on the site.
Good

One of the links is broken or one object is not published (publicly viewable)
Excellent

All links work properly (-1 point per broken or misdirected link).
Embedded objects are public/published- someone who is not logged in as YOU can see them (-1 point for each unviewable object)
Professionalism
Writing and Grammar
1 pts

Poor

Poorly written. Language is not correctly used. There are minor grammatical or typing errors. It lack professional tone.
Fair

Language is correctly used. There are minor grammatical or typing errors. It lack professional tone.
Good

Language is correctly used and there are no grammatical or typing errors. It lacks professional tone.
Excellent

Writing has a professional tone and correct use of language throughout the portfolio.
Page organization
1 pts

Poor

Poor page organization. Pages are not clear and manageable for the viewer. Headings, different fonts, etc are not used to help the viewer.
Fair

Some of the pages are not clear or manageable for the viewer. Headings, different fonts, etc are used but not consistently.
Good

The organization of each page of the portfolio is clear and manageable for the viewer. Headings, different fonts, etc are used but not consistently.
Excellent

The organization of each page of the portfolio is clear and manageable for the viewer. Headings, different fonts, etc are used to add clarity.
Completeness and Coherence
1 pts

Poor

The portfolio does not look like a one-piece project. There are format differences between the pages. It looks like a last-minute work.
Fair

The portfolio does not look complete. There are missing parts/pages. Completed parts are promising but does not convey professionalism.
Good

The portfolio is only lacking a general professional polish. It appears to be a finished product that you are proud of and that conveys professionalism and care rather than rushed, haphazard, or last-minute work that simply meets minimum expectations.
Excellent

The portfolio exhibits a general professional polish. It appears to be a finished product that you are proud of and that conveys professionalism and care rather than rushed, haphazard, or last-minute work that simply meets minimum expectations.



Keywords:
  • e-portfolio w200

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
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
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.


iRubric and RCampus are Trademarks of Reazon Systems, Inc.

Copyright (C) Reazon Systems Inc. All Rights Reserved
n98