Group 6: Effort and Grade Narrative

The team of teachers prepared brief descriptions of individual
students' efforts and results on the final design contributions.


Engineer: Grade received: B

This engineer is an average student who needs to work at staying on task. He was more focused through this unit than we have ever seen him. He completed most requirements for his job except for the charts and graphs. This may be due to a lack of time rather than effort. His maquette model matches the architect's and the calculations are very close but not identical. The architect and engineer needed more time to work together.

Architect: Grade received: A-

Also an average student, this architect had much enthusiasm for her job and worked well with her engineer. She chose to do her blueprint in one continuous stretch for reasons unknown. She has some errors in her calculations but went beyond expectations in other areas. She completed a top view and side view on the car design. She also did two 3-D views. One of those views did not portray the Amazon theme.

Researcher: Grade received: C

This researcher is an accelerated, high-achieving student. He did an excellent job at connecting his research with selling his group's roller coaster, but unfortunately most of his paper failed to follow his thesis and outline. He included some information that does not belong in his report and really should be in a technical report. So some information is redundant. His paper highlights the need for a new section in the rubric that will guide students to provide in-depth research on a specific topic. There needs to be more guidance in this part for all researchers.

Public Relations Director/Presenter: Grade received: B+

Also a high-performing student, she started on her job right away. She was frustrated because she wanted to get her group's information right away to put in her presentation. We got her going on a theme and format for her presentation and she inserted bogus information until she got the group's real information. This was quite effective and we might use this as a strategy for all presenters next year. Unfortunately, she left some of that inaccurate information in and overlooked replacing it; so some information does not match. She was one of the only presenters that incorporated a strong theme in the presentation that had to do with the roller coaster design.

Return to Assessing Learning

* Legal Information and Privacy Policy © 2002 Intel Corporation