Multimedia Grading Rubric

Integrating U. S. History with Educational Technology
Deborah T. Aufdenspring
New Technology High School
Napa, California

Because of our access to technology, we are lucky enough in our classes to be able to allow students a variety of ways of doing projects. This has led to our having to develop a grading rubric for multimedia history presentations.

You are welcome to use this rubric. Don't forget to change the word "history" where applicable. Students who receive less than a "C" grade are asked to re-do their work.

We also have rubrics for: cartoon or animation projects; videotape projects; creative writing projects; research reports; student created magazine or newspaper projects; poster and collage projects; screen plays and skits; and oral presentations. If any of you browsers are interested in my posting those rubrics, e-mail me.

This rubric is not really original. I simply pieced together and added to other anonymous teachers' rubric work. If you know of any credit that should be given to someone for this rubrics, please let me know and I will do so. I would like to thank my colleagues Sandra Mings-Lamar and Cassandra Van Buren for their contributions.

Grading Rubric for a Presentation (Powerpoint or Macro-media Project)

 A B or C  Unsatisfactory 
 1. An outstanding presentation of the theme.

2. Design quality is excellent.

3. Audience is powerfully affected by the presentation.

4. Contains all elements of the B/C presentation.
 1. Presentation is focused with an obvious theme.

2. Each slide or view is composed to show clearly what is intended.

3. The set of slides or views are organized, sequenced smoothly and supports the main theme with clear examples and evidence.

4. Design elements aid the understanding of the historical concepts.

5. Underlying research is accurate and thorough and cited accurately.

6. There are few, if any, grammatical, spelling or mechanical errors.
 1. Theme of presentation is unclear and/or unfocused.

2. Organization is lacking.

3. Little or no supporting information is included.

4. Design elements are distracting and/or inappropriate.

5. There is little evidence of historical research.

6. Research is inaccurately cited or not cited at all.

7. Spelling, mechanical and grammatical errors distract from information.



E-mail me.

Return to your previous page by clicking your browser's "Back" button, or
go to Next Page, or
go to the Site Index, or
Return to Ms. A's Class Home Page