Department of Education

National Capital Region

Schools Division Office – Caloocan City
Caloocan City Science High School
P. Sevilla Street corner 10th Avenue West Grace Park Caloocan City, 1400

Research Rubric
(Adapted from the Criteria set by the student.societyforscience.org)

Title of Research: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Research Team: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CRITERIA Maximum Score

Score
Research Question
 clear and focused purpose
 identifies contribution to field of study 15
 testable using scientific methods
 description of a practical need or problem to be solved
 definition of criteria for proposed solution
 explanation of constraints
Design and Methodology
 well-designed plan and data collection methods
 variables and controls defined, appropriate and complete 35
 exploration of alternatives to answer need or problem
 identification of a solution
 development of a prototype/model
Execution: Data Collection, Analysis and Interpretation
 systematic data collection and analysis
 reproducibility of results
 appropriate application of mathematical and statistical methods 25
 sufficient data collected to support interpretation and conclusions
 prototype demonstrates intended design
 prototype has been tested in multiple conditions/trials
 prototype demonstrates engineering skill and completeness
Poster / Slides
 logical organization of material 25
 clarity of graphics and legends
 supporting documentation displayed
Interview
 clear, concise, thoughtful responses to questions
 understanding of basic science relevant to project 50
 understanding interpretation and limitations of results and conclusions
 degree of independence in conducting project
 recognition of potential impact in science, society and/or economics
 quality of ideas for further research
 for team projects, contributions to and understanding of project by all members
Total
 Department of Education
National Capital Region
Schools Division Office – Caloocan City
Caloocan City Science High School
P. Sevilla Street corner 10th Avenue West Grace Park Caloocan City, 1400

Award for Research Rubric

Name of
Candidate/
Researcher
First Name Middle Initial Last Name

Research Title

Research
Adviser/s

DIRECTIONS: We would like to request for your objective and honest evaluation of the student candidate for the Award for
Research. Please give/write the rating of the student candidate using the indicators per criterion. For total rating,
add all the sub-ratings.

Level of Performance
Criteria and Indicators Needs Very Rating
Satisfactory Outstanding
Improvement Satisfactory
1. Research Grade (20%)
Research Grade X 0.20 = Rating (Round-off up to two decimal places)
2. Output (65%)
a. Usefulness/ 8.75 17.5 26.25 35.00
Significance of
Research paper Research paper
Research Research paper
is not useful/ is somewhat Research paper is
Usefulness to the is useful/
significant to useful/ very
school and/or significant to
the school significant to useful/significant
community or the school
and/or the school to the school
contribution of the and/or
community but and/or and/or
research to the existing community and
its contribution community but community and
body of information its contribution
to the existing its contribution its contribution to
related to the study to the existing
body of to the existing the existing body
(35%) body of
information is body of of information is
information is
somewhat information is very related to
related to the
related to the related to the the study
study
study study
b. Rigor 7.50 15.00 22.50 30.00
Soundness of Only part of All three (3) parts
No part of the Two (2) parts of
methodology (research the of the
methodology is methodology
design, data collection, methodology is methodology are
accurate and are accurate and
and data analysis) accurate and accurate and
consistent consistent
(30%) consistent consistent
3. Research Presentation (15%)
*Based on the research presentation and defense rating

𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒉 𝑷𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈

𝑿 𝟏𝟓 = Rating (Round-off up to two decimal places)
𝑯𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝑷𝒐𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒃𝒍𝒆 𝑹𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈

Total Rating

Signature over PRINTED NAME of the Evaluator Date

 Department of Education
National Capital Region
Schools Division Office – Caloocan City
Caloocan City Science High School
P. Sevilla Street corner 10th Avenue West Grace Park Caloocan City, 1400

Research Advisers Assessment Rubric

Adapted from Coppens, M., Moene, A., Gulikers, J., Kuipers, A., Isken, S. & Woittiez, L. (2010)

To the evaluator: Give your honest assessment about the researcher / groups of researchers as their research adviser / consultant. Affix your name and
signature near the total score at the bottom of this rubric.

0 1 2 3 4 5
Initiative, pro- Researcher Researcher picks Researcher Researcher Researcher has Researcher
activity and shows no up some shows some initiates his own creative develops
creativity initiative or ideas initiatives and/or initiative and/or discussions on ideas on innovative
at all. ideas suggested together with the ideas with hypothesis hypotheses,
by others (e.g. supervisor supervisor and formulation, research methods
____________ supervisor), but develops one or develops one or design or data and/or data-
the selection is two ideas on two own ideas on processing. analysis methods.
not motivated. minor parts of the minor parts of the
research. research.
Commitment Researcher is not Researcher has Researcher is The researcher is The researcher is The researcher is
and motivated. little motivation. motivated at motivated. motivated and/or very motivated,
perseverance Researcher Tends to be times, but often, Overcomes an overcomes an goes at length to
escapes work and distracted easily. sees the work as occasional occasional get the most out
gives up Has given up a compulsory setback with help setback on his of the project
____________ regularly. once or twice. task. Is distracted of the supervisor. own and
from thesis work considers the
now and then. work as his “own”
project.
Time No planning is Planning is Planning is Planning is quite Planning is quite Planning is
management made. without any detail, somewhat concrete, but concrete and concrete and
not feasible and concrete but not some aspects of feasible, but feasible and
backup strategies feasible and the planning are backup strategies backup strategies
____________ are lacking. backup strategies not feasible and are insufficient. are sufficient.
are lacking. backup strategies
are insufficient.
Completion of Final version of Final version of Final version of Final version of Final version of Final version of
Task Research and Research and Research and Research and Research and Research and
presentation presentation at presentation at presentation at presentation at presentation
____________ hugely overdue one-two months most a month most two weeks most one week finished within
(without a valid overdue (without overdue (without overdue (without overdue (without planned period.
reason). a valid reason). valid reason). valid reasons). valid reasons).
Critical and self- Researcher Researcher is not Researcher is Researcher is Researcher is Researcher is
reflective doesn’t realize able to point out able to point out able to point out able to point out able to point out
capacity the occurrence of strengths and some strengths many of the most of the most of the
strengths and weaknesses of and weaknesses strengths and strengths and strengths and
weaknesses of the research of the research weaknesses of weaknesses of weaknesses of
____________ the research (plan). (plan). the research the research the research
(plan). (plan). (plan). (plan) and is able
to give some
constructive
suggestions for
improvement.
Handling Researcher does The supervisor Researcher Researcher Supervisor's Supervisor's
supervisor's not pick up needs to act as incorporates incorporates most comments are comments are
comments suggestions and an instructor and some of the or all of the weighed by the critically weighed
ideas of the constantly needs comments of the supervisor's researcher and by the researcher
supervisor. to suggest supervisor, but comments. asked for when and asked for
____________ solutions for ignores others needed. when needed,
problems. without also from other
arguments. staff members or
researchers.
Knowledge Researcher does The researcher The researcher The researcher The researcher Researcher is
study domain not master the does not understands the understands the understands the well on top of
most basic understand all of subject matter of subject matter of subject matter of subjects
knowledge (even the subject matter the thesis on a the thesis on a the thesis discussed in
____________ below the starting discussed in the textbook level. textbook level and including the thesis: not only
level for the thesis. realizes the literature used in does he
thesis). importance of the thesis. understand but he
literature without is also aware of
Name and Signature of Research Adviser: using it. current
Total Score discussions in the
____________ ________________________________________________ literature related
to the thesis topic.
 Department of Education
National Capital Region
Schools Division Office – Caloocan City
Caloocan City Science High School
P. Sevilla Street corner 10th Avenue West Grace Park Caloocan City, 1400

PEER EVALUATION FORM

Adapted from Copyright 2012 by Chad Manis, Teacher Written EduWare LLC

Write the names of your group members in the numbered boxes. Then, assign yourself a value for each listed attribute. Finally, do the
same for each of your group members and total all of the values.
Values: 1=Strongly Agree 2=Agree 3=Disagree 4=Strongly Disagree

YOURSELF 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Was dependable in
attending group
meetings
Willingly accepted
assigned tasks
Contributed
positively to group
discussions
Completed work on
time or made
alternative
arrangements
Helped others with
their work when
needed
Did work accurately
and completely
Contributed fair
share to papers for
submission
Worked well with
other group
members
Overall was a
valuable member of
the team
Total

Briefly describe your contribution to the project

____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________

If you were doing this project again, what would you do differently to improve your work?
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________

How could your team work together more effectively next time?
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________