Reed+& Andrew's evaluation  

CONTEXT STATEMENT RUBRIC Name of Evaluator: Andrew and Reed

Score: 13/30 Introduction: /5 points

5: Intro provides an overview of the upcoming analysis, including what school/district/community is being analyzed, what aspects are being analyzed, and whom the report is intended to inform.

4: Intro names the school/district/community and previews the scope of the report, but does not describe whom the report is intended to inform.

3: Intro names the school/district/community but not much else.

2: Intro fails to name the school, district, and/or community.

0: No introduction section is apparent. Comments on report's introduction: (Add more info about what end outcome is)

Organization: /5 points

5: Report includes the following sections: Introduction, Community, District, School, Conclusion, References.

4: Report includes all sections but does not break information into paragraphs, has few transitions, or is otherwise lacking in coherence.

3: Report is missing one section.

2: Report is not divided into sections but contains some information on each.

1: Report is missing two or more sections. Comments on report's organization: (work on Conclusion and references)

Mechanics: /5 points

5. All information is cited using APA in-text citations. A properly formatted References section appears at the end of the report. Consistent voice. Sophisticated and varied sentence structure.

There are few typos or errors in spelling, grammar, or syntax.

4: Most information is cited and referenced using APA format. There are some errors in spelling, grammar, or syntax but they do not interfere with meaning. Consistent voice. Sentence structure is varied and sophisticated for the most part.

3: Some information is not cited or referenced. APA format not followed or followed incorrectly. There are some errors in spelling, grammar, or syntax that interfere with meaning. Mostly consistent voice. Somewhat simplistic sentence structure.

2: Most of the information is not cited. APA formatting is negligible or nonexistent. Multiple errors in spelling, grammar, or syntax interfere with meaning. Inconsistent voice. Simplistic sentence structure.

0: No citations. No references. Myriad errors in spelling, grammar, or syntax make the report a chore to read. Inconsistent voice. Simplistic sentence structure.

Comments on report’s mechanics/conventions: (add citations and clean up)

Creativity: /5

5. Report is engaging and colorful. Charts, graphs, and images add professionalism and interest and are well integrated into the report.

4: Report contains some interesting sections. Charts, graphs and images are relevant and add interest to the report.

3:. Information is reported in a disengaged manner. Charts, graphs, and images add little to the report. Comments on report's creativity: (no comments)

Conclusion: /5

5: Conclusion reviews analysis of school, district and community and describes why findings should be important to reader.

4: Conclusion reviews analysis of school, district and community

3: Conclusion does not report back to report's findings.

1: Conclusion simply praises or condemns the school.

0: No conclusion. Comments on report's conclusion: (needs work)

Data/Analysis: /10 5: Report includes at least ten different facts in each section (school, community, district) and compares each figure with another relevant figure.

4: Report includes at least eight different facts in each section and compares most figures with relevant figures.

3: Report includes at least six different facts in each section and compares some figures to other relevant figures.

2: Report includes at least four different facts in each section and compares some figures to other relevant figures.

0: Report includes less than four different facts for any section or fails to compare any figures with other relevant figures Comments on data/analysis/General comments: (project looks nice but needs more text)