INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

ENGINEERING FACULTY
UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SURAKARTA
Module Code:
Modul

Scoring Rubric for Teamwork

The scoring rubric provides descriptions of five levels of student performance
relating to Teamwork (where a score of 5 represents very good performance and
a score of 1 represents very poor performance).
The rubric is underpinned by specific behavioural indicators of Teamwork, these
are:
Clear goals, agendas and ground-rules
Appropriate identification and utilization of team-roles
Use of facilitation skills and techniques in maximizing team
performance and managing potential sources of conflict

In scoring student performance, it is often the case that some students do not
nicely relate to all the behavioural indicators in any one description of
performance (e.g., they may fit most indicators quite well but are better or worse
on the others). However, choose the description that you feel is the most
appropriate in terms of the score to be given for the individual student.
Score
5

Description of performance
Highly effective use of goal setting, agendas and ground rales of team
conduct Team roles fully utilized for benefit of the team
Facilitation skills and techniques are consistently well employed in
maximizing team performance and managing potential sources of
conflict
Overall good use of goal setting, agendas and ground rules of team
conduct Team roles generally utilized for benefit of the team
Facilitation skills and techniques are well employed in maximizing
team performance and managing potential sources of conflict
Effective use of goal setting, agendas and ground rules of team
conduct are only partly evident Team roles occasionally utilized for
benefit of the team
Some facilitation skills and techniques are employed in maximizing
team performance and managing potential sources of conflict
Limited use of effective goal setting, agendas and ground rules of
team conduct Team roles rarely utilized for benefit of the team
Few facilitation skills and techniques employed in maximizing team
performance and managing potential sources of conflict
A very poor performance in this area of competence

INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

ENGINEERING FACULTY
UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SURAKARTA
Module Code:
Modul

Scoring Rubric for Oral Presentation Skills

The scoring rubric provides descriptions of five levels of student performance
relating to Oral Presentation (where a score of 5 represents very good
performance and a score of 1 represents very poor performance).
The rubric is underpinned by specific behavioural indicators of oral presentation,
these are:

Clarity of voice, tone and modularity

Appropriateness of presentation structure and style to specific

audience

Calibration of non verbal communication to the spoken words

(e.g., posture, eye contact and gestures)

Answering questions in a clear, concise and focused manner.

In scoring student performance, it is often the case that some students do not
nicely relate to all the behavioural indicators in any one description of
performance (e.g., they may fit most indicators quite well but are better or worse
on the others). However, choose the description that you feel is the most
appropriate in terms of the score to be given for the individual student.

Score
5

Description of performance
Voice is consistently clear and effective in terms of tone and
modularity. Presentation structure and style fully relates to audience.
Non-verbal communication is highly calibrated to spoken word. All
questions answered in a clear, concise and focused manner

Voice is generally clear and effective in terms of tone and modularity.

Presentation structure and style mainly relates to audience. Nonverbal communication is calibrated to spoken word. Most questions
answered in a clear, concise and focused manner

Voice is occasionally clear and effective in terms of tone and

modularity. Presentation structure and style relates to audience in part
Non-verbal communication is sometimes calibrated to spoken word.
Some questions answered in a clear, concise and focused manner

Voice has limited clarity and effectiveness in terms of tone and

modularity. Presentation structure and style rarely relates to audience
Non-verbal communication is mainly not calibrated to spoken word.
Few questions answered in a clear, concise and focused manner

A very poor performance in this area of competence

INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

ENGINEERING FACULTY
UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SURAKARTA
Module Code:
Modul

Scoring Rubric for Written Communication in Report Writing

The scoring rubric provides descriptions of five levels of student performance
relating to of Written Communication in Report Writing (where a score of 5
represents very good performance and a score of 1 represents very poor
performance). The rubric is underpinned by specific behavioural indicators of
Written Communication in Report Writing, these are:

Adherence to technical report writing conventions (e.g., structure,

sequencing, referencing, etc)
Clarity and appropriateness of language (e.g., grammar, vocabulary, tone
and style, etc) in conveying meaning
Use of supporting presentational aids (e.g., diagrams, tables, charts,
pictures, etc

In scoring student performance, it is often the case that some students do not
nicely relate to all the behavioural indicators in any one description of
performance (e.g., they may fit most indicators quite well but are better or worse
on the others). However, choose the description that you feel is the most
appropriate in terms of the score to be given for the individual student.
Score
5
4

3
2

Description of performance
Technical report writing conventions fully met
Language use is consistently clear, appropriate and conveys meaning
effectively Presentational aids fully support the written text
Technical report writing conventions met in the main
Language use is mainly clear, appropriate and conveys meaning
effectively
Presentational aids largely support the written text
Technical report writing conventions met only in part
Language use is sometimes clear, appropriate and conveys meaning
effectively Presentational aids support the written text in part
Few technical report writing conventions met
Language use is limited in clarity, appropriateness and conveying
meaning effectively Presentational aids do not support the written text
in the main
A very poor performance in this area of competence