Rubric for Problem-Solving

The key issue or problem to be addressed is clearly identified. Relevant questions are asked to help clarify facts, concepts, and relationships. Hypothesis is clearly stated.

Problem statement has some ambiguity or misses some important issues. Questions may not address all issues. Some assistance needed in formulating hypothesis or developing list of questions.

Problem is poorly defined. Key issue is not understood. Few or no questions are formulated. Hypothesis is lacking or incorrect. Major assistance is needed with design.

Problem to be addressed is highly relevant to the subject matter, is not too broad or too narrow in scope, and its resolution advances general understanding of the subject matter.

Problem is of moderate interest, or may be too narrow or too broad in scope. Resolution makes moderate contribution to advancing understanding.

Problem lacks relevance, or is so poorly described that its relevance is hard to determine. Results are unlikely to further general understanding.

Several appropriate sources of relevant information are identified. Previous knowledge is applied effectively to the current problem, and well integrated with new information.

Limited number of sources consulted. Some previous knowledge is recalled and integrated, but help is needed to expand the scope of information gathered or make correct connections.

Few or no information sources consulted, or inappropriate ones used. No connection made to previous knowledge. No integration of prior knowledge and new information.

Strategy to follow is clear and well thought out. A written framework or plan of action is prepared that accounts for all tasks and decision-making points. Tasks to be accomplished are arranged logically. Ability to adjust plan of action as new information is obtained is built into design.

Design or strategy is worked out but may lack clarity or some key component. Plan of action may lack some key points. Guidance may be needed in prioritizing tasks. Moderately successful in adjusting plan of action in response to new information obtained.

Design or strategy is poorly defined or lacking. Plan of action is vague, incomplete, or missing entirely. Tasks are not organized logically or prioritized. Effect of different outcomes on the plan is not recognized or considered.

Appropriate methods are used efficiently to accomplish tasks, which are assigned equally to team members taking into account individual expertise and skills. Results are used continuously to refine plans and adjust methods. Methods and results are well documented.

Generally appropriate methods are used, but may lack efficiency or may need to be redone. Reasonably equal sharing of tasks and responsibilities. May need reminder to refine plans based on new information. Adequate recording of methods and results.

Methods are inappropriate, or are not used correctly. Responsibilities are not shared. Data obtained are inadequate or incorrect, and tasks cannot be completed as planned. Poor documentation of methods and results. No refining of plans based on results.

Results are summarized and interpreted accurately. Correct conclusions are made and related to the starting hypothesis. Unexplained results are accounted for and alternative hypotheses suggested. All components of project are clearly presented.

Results are summarized and organized, but may lack some details or some explanation. Conclusions are generally correct but may be incomplete. May not suggest alternative hypotheses. All components of project are presented, but may lack some details.

Results are poorly organized. Conclusions are lacking, incorrect, or not based on evidence. No reference is made to starting hypothesis, or no suggestion of alternative hypotheses is given. Difficult to determine what was done from the information given.