Genetics Project Rubric

Grading criteria
4 3 2 1
Was the disease
described in terms
of genetic
mutations?
Genetic mutation was described in good
detail and in appropriate language
Association was made between the
mutation and the disease
Genetic mutation was described in
moderate detail and in appropriate
language
Association was made between the
mutation and the disease
Genetic mutation was described but
with inadequate detail
Loose association made between the
mutation and the disease
Genetic mutation was poorly
described
Difficult to make an association
between the mutation and the
disease
Was a connection
made between
the mutation and
the structure or
function of cells?
A clear connection was made between
the mutation and the structure or
function of the cells
A good connection was made between
the mutation and the structure or
function of the cells
Connection between mutation and cell
function was made but in insufficient
detail
Poor connection between the
mutation and cellular structure
or function.
Were the effects
of the mutation
described in
sufficient detail?
The major effects of the mutation on
the affected organs and individual were
clearly described
Adequate description of the effects of
the mutation on the organs or
individual
Some effects of the mutation were
described but key features of the
disease were missed
Little or no description of how
the mutation affects the organs
or the individual
Is the language
appropriate for
the intended
audience?
Language is appropriate to
communicate the information
effectively to the average adult with no
medical background
Language is sufficient to communicate
the information with occasional
difficult jargon requiring clarification
Language is too complex or too simple
for the intended audience. Terms need
to be clarified or better defined
Little regard for the background
knowledge of the intended
audience. Poor use of language.
Were visual aids
used effectively?
At least two visual aids were included to
demonstrate ideas or clarify points
Visuals were relevant, had impact,
supplemented the text, and contributed
to understanding
At least two visuals were included
Visuals were relevant to the
information presented but did not
necessarily contribute to
understanding
At least one visual was included
Visuals were remotely relevant to the
subject but did not add to
understanding
At least one visual was included
Visual was not related to the
subject
Is the end product
useful in
educating
someone about
his/her disease?
The information adds to the average
persons knowledge and of the disease
Someone seeking information on the
disease would find the information
extremely helpful
Information is accurate
Contains sufficient information about
the disease
Someone seeking information on the
disease would find the information
somewhat helpful
Information is mostly accurate
Too little or too much information for
the average adult
Someone seeking information on the
disease would find the information of
little use
Information is mostly accurate
Little or no information useful for
the average adult
Useless information in education
someone about the disease
Factual errors and
inconsistencies

Genetics Project Rubric

Grading criteria
4 3 2 1
Were at least 2
content standards
demonstrated?
Two content standards were addressed
thoroughly
Information and questions reflected
understanding of the standards
Two content standards were
addressed
Information and questions reflected
sufficient thought about the standards
At least one content standard was
addressed
Information and questions did not
necessarily reflect thought about the
standards
No regards for the content
standards
Information and question
unrelated to the standards
Were at least 3
FAQs included?
Three FAQs listed and answered
FAQs are directly relevant to the
mutation or disease.
Three FAQs listed and answered
FAQs not directly relevant to the
mutation or disease
At least two FAQs listed and answered
FAQs do not address the mutation or
the disease process
At least one FAQ listed
FAQs unrelated to the mutation
or disease
Formatting and
organization
Formatting and organization enhance
communication of content
Visually appealing
Formatting and organization are logical
but do not necessarily help
communication
Do not detract from or aid visual
appeal
Formatting and organization make flow
of information difficult
Detract from visual appeal
Little or no evidence of thought
to formatting and organization
Information is haphazard and
disorganized
Language
mechanics
No spelling, grammar or punctuation
errors.
Excellent use of vocabulary and word
choice.
Few (1 to 3) spelling, grammatical, or
punctuation errors
Good use of vocabulary and word
choice
Minimal (3 to 5) spelling, grammatical,
or punctuation errors
Low-level use of vocabulary and word
choice
More than 5 spelling,
grammatical, or punctuation
errors
Poor use of vocabulary and word
choice