Scrapbook

Exceeds Expectations 10-9

Meets Expectations 8-7 Evidence of some research; information is mostly correct; info is presented pretty clear

Minimally meets expectations 6-5 Little evidence of research; some components missing; might be missing key pieces of information Decent quality. Lacking in some components or some components messy. Included, but could be better. Length or content issues. Timeline incorporated. Only a handful of events. Not clear or easy to read. Too few pictures and/or not right kind of pictures. Not really relevant to character.

Does not meet expectations 4-3-2-1 Little to no evidence of research; missing several components

Content Accuracy

Evidence of research; historically correct information; info presented clearly

Quality

Very high quality High work. Shows quality. Shows evidence of time spent. significant amount of time. Neat/clean.

Poor quality. Seriously lacking in some components.

Section 1: Bio

Included. Good length and description

Included. May be a little long or short. usable description. Timeline incorporated. Correct number of events. Most clear/easy to read. Right amount of pictures. Could do a better job conveying image. Appropriate pictures for character. Enough documents. Mostly creative. Adds to book. Mostly historically

Component missing or poorly done.

Section 2 timeline

Timeline incorporated. More than 8 events included. Clear/easy to read

No timeline or poorly done. Not clear or easy to read.

Section 3 More than enough Photographs photographs. Add to overall feel of book. Appropriate pictures for character.

Component missing or poorly done. No/too few pictures. Not relevant to character.

Section 4 Documents

More than enough documents. Creative. Adds to overall book. Historically accurate.

Not enough documents. Does not enhance book. Some inaccuracies.

Component missing or poorly done. No/not enough documents. Many inaccuracies.

accurate. Section 5 Artifacts More than enough artifacts. Creative. Adds to overall book. Historically accurate. Enough artifacts. Mostly creative. Adds to book. Mostly historically accurate. Well written. Might be some errors in spelling or grammar. Evidence of some work, but could be behind schedule Not enough artifacts. Does not enhance book. Some inaccuracies. Component missing or poorly done. No/not enough artifacts. Many inaccuracies.

Grammar

Well written/edited. Good language usage. Little to no errors in spelling or grammar. Evidence of progress; able to show significant research and/or movie slides

Many errors in grammar, spelling or language usage Not enough evidence; behind schedule

Numerous errors in all grammatical categories. Little to no evidence of work; might not finish on time

Progress check

TV Show/Panel Discussion

Exceeds Expectations 10-9

Meets Expectations 8-7 Knows many/most details about the person/persona through comments and questions Knows many/most details about other roles through comments and questions Eye contact, body language, voice inflection, speaking tone are ok

Minimally meets expectations 6-5 Shows little knowledge or understanding of their person/persona

Does not meet expectations 4-3-2-1

Level of understanding/knowledge of SELF

Presenter clearly demonstrates knowledge and understanding of their person/persona through comments and questions Presenter clearly demonstrates knowledge and understanding of other person/personas through interactions, comments and questions Very good eye contact, body language, voice inflection, speaking tone

Does not demonstrate any knowledge or understanding of their chosen role Does not demonstrate any knowledge or understanding about the role of others Lack of skill in most/all of the communication skills listed.

Level of understanding/knowledge of OTHERS

Shows little knowledge of the role played by other people on the panel

Oral Communication skills

Lack of skill shown in one or more of the communication skills listed.

Interactions with Outstanding Moderator/audience/panel interactions. Asks and answers questions correctly and without referring to notes

Good interactions. Asks and answers some questions. May have referred to notes A little long/short in length. Not clear. May not have indicated characters role in war.

Some interactions not good. Referred to notes frequently. Was not able to interact with others. Length was not good. Writing/speaking was not clear and did not identify who the person was well.

Little to no interaction with anyone.

Introduction/written component (1 min)

Good length. Clearly and articulately indicates characters role in the war

May not be completed. Poor length, clarity, or articulation of the characters role in the war

Total Points