Rubric

Grading

This information complements the course syllabus.

Our grade sheet is posted here. Please use your student code emailed to you at the beginning of the quarter to identify your grades.

Students will be given numerical scores according to the following breakdown:

• Written Assessment: 50%

  • Short homework: 3% each, five assignments total
    Brief assignments assessing comprehension of recent topics. Graded primarily for completion. The purpose is feedback for the instructor to adjust the course pace.

  • Long homework: 7% each, five assignments total
    Substantial assignments to demonstrate mastery of topics. Graded for validity of approach, clarity of presentation (explain what you are doing and why), and correct application of mathematical techniques. 

• Presented Assessment: 24%

  • Explainer Videos: 6% each, four videos total
    Based on long homework. Graded for clarity of presentation, didactic and pedagogical strategy, and peer reviews. See rubric for peer reviews below.

• Metacognitive Review: 12%

  • Peer Reviews of Explainer Videos: 3% per batch, four batches total.
    See rubric below. Graded for completion.

• Pedagogical Writing: 10%

  • Course essay: 10%
    Graded for validity, pedagogical clarity.

• Contributions to the course: 4%

  • Pre-course survey: 2%

  • Introductory video: 2%

  • Possibility for extra points for course engagement including extra credit problems, meaningful contributions to course discussions (e.g. excellent questions), corrections to course materials.

P231 Video Rubric

Your explainer videos will be graded by your peers based on how well you convey the relevant information to them. You will be asked to fill a Google Form for each video that you review. You will write a brief paragraph (up to one page) addressing the following metrics. You do not have to give a numerical score.

Statement of Problem

Does the explainer tell you what they're about to explain? You should be able to watch the video without having to refer to the problem. You should feel like there is a clear strategy that you can write out and follow.

Grade rubric:

• 5/5: States problem and objectives clearly, identifies a strategy to solve the problem.

• 4/5: States problem and objectives, but some ambiguity about goals or strategy.

• 3/5: States problem, but strategy is not identified. (Just starts solving.)

• 2/5: Identifies problem ("problem #2 in the book"), but does not explain what is being asked.

• 1/5: Does not identify problem.

Solution Quality

Is the solution correct? Does the solution convey the key physics required? We are primarily interested in the method, not the numbers.

Grade rubric:

• 5/5: Uses correct physical/mathematical principles and appropriate mathematics to solve problem. Explains why each step is taken. Results are correct.

• 4/5: Uses correct physical/mathematical principles and appropriate mathematics to solve problem, but it may not be clear why those are the correct steps or may make minor mistakes.

• 3/5: Basic understanding of physical/mathematical principles, but may misuse the principles or apply strategies that are either incorrect or are not shown to be correct. (If the strategy doesn't make sense, then it's not useful to you even if it gives the correct result.)

• 2/5: Incorrect application of physical principles or mathematical tools.

• 1/5: No meaningful application of physical principles or mathematical tools.

Figure(s)

Solutions should include at least one figure: a sketch, plot, cartoon, or other visual description.

Grade rubric:

• 5/5: The figure helps motivate the question, clarify the strategy, and define variables.

• 4/5: The figure is helpful, but may be missing key pieces of information.

• 3/5: The figure is appropriate to the problem, but does not contribute to the explanation.

• 2/5: The figure is not the relevant one for the problem, there is a better one to draw.

• 1/5: No figure, but there should have been one.

Context

Solving the problem is just part of understanding the material. Does the video explain why this problem is relevant to the week's material? What principles from the reading does it reinforce? What is the significance? Does it identify any follow up questions? Does it identify potential mistakes?

Grade Rubric

• 5/5: Identifies the learning goals the problem reinforces. Points out the "tricky parts" of the problem to make sure listeners avoid possible mistakes. Relates to ideas both in and beyond the reading, identifies follow up questions, or otherwise provides "flavor" beyond the problem itself.

• 4/5: Identifies the learning goals the problem reinforces. Points out the "tricky parts" of the problem to make sure listeners avoid possible mistakes.

• 3/5: Identifies the learning goals the problem reinforces. May point out "tricky parts" of the problem, but with some errors.

• 2/5: Partial identification of the learning goals the problem reinforces; perhaps with errors.

• 1/5: Does not provide any context ("just solves the problem").

Went Over Time (check box)

Please mark this if the presentation went significantly over time.

You have a time limit because you rarely have the ability to explain something for arbitrarily long times. This means that you need to be able to explain the big picture, then explain which details are most critical. Sometimes means that you have to say "when you do the algebra, you end up with...".

Special Recognition (check box)

Please mark this if you'd like to nominate the presentation for special recognition as an excellent example. (Suggestion: at most, nominate only about one video per week.)

Controversial (check box)

Please mark this if you're unsure about the solution and would like a more careful look at the video. Part of how we test your understanding of the material is being able to make clear assessments about your peers; so please only mark this if you feel that there are extenuating reasons why the video is challenging to evaluate.

Constructive Feedback and Comments

Please provide some brief constructive, friendly feedback for the author of the video. As you are  aware, these videos are challenging to make: the feedback should be helpful and actionable. Point out errors and topics that may benefit from review, offer ways to improve.

• Always include positive comments.

Your constructive criticism should have specific actionable suggestions.

Not useful feedback: "Make the video shorter."

• Useful feedback: "Next time, you can skip working out the algebra and just write out the key intermediate steps while briefly explaining how to derive them."

We ask that you send a copy of the entire form or at least this written feedback to the person you are reviewing.

Avoiding Bias

Be specific and deliberate in your peer reviews; base everything on the explainer video itself, and avoid bringing in outside information. Do not include judgement of video production quality, individual qualities irrelevant to technical communication (e.g. personal identity). This requires active effort to be fair.