Initial Rubric Criteria Thoughts

CS in Science
81
  1. Basic coding - were students able to complete the coding they were assigned and the programs were functional
  2. Scientific content - did students understand the DCIs
  3. Collaboration - did the members of each team contribute equally
  4. The first three categories to me would put a student at standard. I think the 4th category could be the category for students who want to go above and beyond based on their ability level. This could be “creativity” or something like that where students can come up with new independent variables to test and create coding to do so.
82

If I were to create a rubric, I would first decide if I was assessing a learning project or a performance project.

Learning Project
Perseverance
Developing Coding Skills
Developing Scientific Accuracy

Performance Project
Presentation
Coding Skills
Scientific Accuracy

I think there should be a distinction between a project where the students are developing understanding and a project where they show mastery.

83

I really like reading many of the responses. You guys have Great ideas and it really helps to see how other peers are grading their students. My students will be doing the ecosystem module. They will create a predator and prey module of their own. the following criteria would be graded:

Collaboration- working successfully with a coding partner, continuing to collaborate whether you are the driver or the navigator.
Coding Basics- using basic coding rules to reach module goals- having a working model at the end of the lesson
Scientific Knowledge- being able to write a CER (Claim, Evidence, Reasoning) conclusion about the scientific concept the module is based on.
Creativity- being able to create their own ecosystem module with all the components necessary AND their ability to get creative with coding

84

I feel the most important categories would be:
Coding skills: Demonstrating knowledge and skills of coding.
Scientific Understanding: Using a model to make meaning of a scientific concept(s) and applying it to real life situations.
Collaboration: Working effectively with others (in programming pairs and large group).
Perseverance: Demonstrating effective problem solving strategies through completion of a task.

85

I created a mini-rubric to go with the Progress monitors provided by ProjectGUTS so I could let students know if they had achieved the goals and what needed to be fixed. I was hoping that there was some sort of answer key for a lot of the questions that went with module 1 where students are asked to think about how doing XXX relates to a CAS. I think I would have to further develop those understandings before I moved into a CS in Sci module. Having not doing anything past Module 1, I would use a rubric to assess performance. I think My 4 categories would be basic coding, explanation of code, science content, and application of CAS to real world.

87

I agree with many of the posts here. I think the 4 main areas to assess are:
Coding
Perseverance
Application of scientific knowledge
Ability to work with others (collaboration)
I think I would look at more then just the code to assess these areas. I think I would include a log with debugging attempts as part of perseverance, a self and partner evaluation for part of the collaboration. And some sort of written explanation to help assess the scientific knowledge.

88

I definitely think that the rubric should allow for students to receive a great score for completing the task. However, excellent scores or perfect scores should only be given to the students who are able to go a step beyond the task and add or extend the task in some way.

89

I used this rubric in my class -
Coding (How the student designs and types the code)
1- The code does not work.
2- Code works but does contain inaccuracies and ‘bugs’. Evidence of extra code as well as ‘copy-paste’ code.
3- Code works reasonably well and the program executes and runs.
4- Code works very well and evidence of a clearly thought out and well planned program is evident via the organization of code (no extras, compact, sequential, and easy to locate blocks)
Creativity/Logical (How the student uses his own imagination and creative thinking)
1- Code does not work – Clear evidence of ‘copy/paste’ and insufficient code
2- Code works but requires too much code or code that are disjointed/not organized
3- Code works reasonably well and the code organized
4- Code works very well, planned and executed from the bottom up, uses the most efficient and shortest ways to solve problems
Attitude/Motivation (How the student maintains scholarly behavior)
1 – Student requires explanation/help for everything. Does what is required and refuses to help
Others
2 – Student works quietly and perseveres through ‘brute force’
3 – Student collaborates, asks good questions, studies what is needed, and creates code that
works well
4 – Student volunteers to teach others
CS in Science Application (Designing an appropriate simulation)
1- Student does not understand relationships between objects and cannot demonstrate how simulation works
2- The student shows a simulation somewhat but is missing the ‘big picture’
3- The simulation works as intended but could be improved with originality
4- Really good simulation that is also original in nature. Clearly shows creative thinking and recognizes the audience’ need for clarity.

90

Rubric 1.JPG993×590 179 KB

91
  1. working together - as it is a partnership, they need to be working effectively together (not one doing all the work, or arguing)
  2. time management - in all fields, there is a time piece and working within a time frame is essential
  3. completion of basic goals - showing ability to complete basic goals is foundational and necessary
  4. attempting of some extension - being willing to extend the thoughts and learning is a lifetime process that needs to be taught and through school should be promoted. This is where making major or minor mistakes is good and not detrimental to the tangible reward of a grade and therefore it is a safe place to have fun with learning and learning that mistakes are part of learning.
92

Collaboration- ability to work with others
Efficiency- completing the challenge in as few steps as possible
Persevering- not giving up and trying multiple entry points when first not successful
Scientific Knowledge- the ability to explain their code and how it works

93

Readability-the code is organized and easy to follow.
Reusability- the code could be reused.
Specifications- the program works and meets all the criteria.
Model Complexity- shows evidence of complex details.

94

coding skills
application of inquiry skills
collaboration
effort and perseverance

95

I totally agree with your rubric.

96

To assess a computer model I would include the following in a rubric:

  1. accuracy of code application in science
  2. collaboration with peers (Master student-coders peer-tutoring, etc.)
  3. debugging perseverance
  4. complexity and creativity in model design extensions
97

I thought I shared this a long time ago - but can’t find it :frowning: So here it is:
https://docs.google.com/a/northstarcharter.org/document/d/1G6oOudJK7_ELdW38S7-JneT6jWrGBZJyjaBXgXjbKSA/edit?usp=sharing

98

Collaboration - Working together sharing the Driver/Navigator responsibilities
Completion of the Experimental Design Form - creating a testable question and collecting data.
Basics of Coding - Proven knowledge of use of basic coding.
Presentation - How are things arranged in Spaceland.

99
  1. choosing a relevant scenario to model with CAS and understanding the model (what the agents represent, what interactions etc)
  2. accurate code
  3. analysis of model results
  4. presentation of results
100

“I would include code vocabulary and how it relates to science
collaboration is important and is everyone contributing on a daily basis
can students relate coding to the real world and have an understanding of the importance of a simulation
basic understanding of how to write code.”
I would also grade students on their ability to perform tasks on slnova.

101

Categories for CS rubric:

  1. Accuracy in coding - Students should be able to write out a logical code before they get on the computer. They will need to plan in advance what they are going to do and how things should work with their code.
  2. Content Knowledge - Students should be able to connect the project they are working on with the content being taught.
  3. Creativity - Students should be able to not only complete the basic code, but should also be able to extend the simulation they have created and show something new that is not in the basic code.
  4. Presentation - Students should be able to present their final product to the class and be able to show the other students how they were able to get their code to work and any extensions they may have created as well.