Outcome rubric for this Project by:

Assessed by:

Component	Advanced Level (18-20 pts)	Intermediate Level (15-17 pts.)	Beginner Level (14 or under)
State the astronomical claim and provide the evidence	The claim is stated clearly and specifically. Viewer understands exactly being claimed and how the student arrived at this claim. The evidence/arguments in support of the claim are rendered in detail and in a manner that demonstrates that the student understands them as opposed to just reciting them by rote.	The claim is stated in a way that makes it testable. However, it may not be as clear or as specific as it could be. The evidence/arguments in support of the claim are rendered well, although some details may be left out. Some of the evidence may seem as though student does not fully understand it but my only by reciting it by rote.	The claim is either not stated or is stated unclearly or non-specifically. The evidence for the claim is incomplete or confused. Where evidence is provided, it may not be clear that the student sees the connection between the evidence and the claim. Viewer may get the impression that the student is simply presenting evidence s/he does not fully understand.
State the alternative hypothesis and provide the evidence	The hypothesis is stated clearly and specifically. It is plausible, consistent, and compelling. Viewer understands exactly being claimed and how the student arrived at this claim. The evidence/arguments in support of the claim are rendered in detail and in a manner that demonstrates that the student understands them as opposed to just reciting them by rote.	The hypothesis is stated in a way that makes it testable. However, it may not be as clear or as specific as it could be; it may be somewhat implausible. The evidence/arguments in support of the claim are rendered well, although some details may be left out. Some of the evidence may seem as though student does not fully understand it but my only by reciting it by rote.	The claim is either not stated or is stated unclearly or non-specifically; it may be pretty implausible, too. The evidence for the claim is incomplete or confused. Where evidence is provided, it may not be clear that the student sees the connection between the evidence and the claim. Viewer may get the impression that the student is simply presenting evidence s/he does not fully understand.
Evaluate Evidence for the astronomical claim	A number of pieces of evidence in support of the claim/hypothesis are offered and critiqued carefully, thoughtfully, and completely. Student articulates the nature and limitations of the evidence. S/he considers whether any of the evidence should be rejected and if so, why. Student carefully assesses the hypotheses according to the criteria of adequacy.	Some evidence in support of the claim/hypothesis is offered and critiqued. Student needs to say more to articulate the nature and limitations of the evidence. S/he needs to explain further whether any of the evidence should be rejected and if so, why Additional evidence may be less than fully fleshed out.	Evidence in support of the claim is either not offered or the connection between the evidence and the claim is not made clear. Student does not really analyze the evidence carefully and/or say whether any of the evidence should be rejected or why. Student needs to more seriously consider really viable and reasonable alternatives.

Notes:

Evaluate Evidence for the alternative hypothesis.	A number of pieces of evidence in support of the claim/hypothesis are offered and critiqued carefully, thoughtfully, and completely. Student articulates the nature and limitations of the evidence. S/he considers whether any of the evidence should be rejected and if so, why. Hypothesis is creative and thoughtful and represents a reasonable alternative to the original hypothesis that is offered. Any additional hypotheses are similarly thoughtful and careful. Student carefully assesses the alternate hypotheses according to the criteria of adequacy.	Some evidence in support of the claim/hypothesis is offered and critiqued. Student needs to say more to articulate the nature and limitations of the evidence. . S/he needs to explain further whether any of the evidence should be rejected and if so, why Additional evidence may be less than fully fleshed out.	Evidence in support of the claim is either not offered or the connection between the evidence and the claim is not made clear. Student does not really analyze the evidence carefully and/or say whether any of the evidence should be rejected or why. Student needs to more seriously consider really viable and reasonable alternatives.
Comparison of the support for the claims	Student gives a thoughtful and complete comparison of the ways in which the two claims are supported. S/he explains ways in which the evidence is similar and different. S/he articulates clearly whether one set of evidence provides a better reason for accepting the claim and if so, why. S/he draws conclusion(s) about the differences/similarities between scientific reasoning and other ways of knowing.	Student gives an adequate comparison of the ways in which the two claims are supported. S/he offers some ways in which the evidence is similar and different, but leaves a few questions unanswered. S/he mentions whether one set of evidence provides a better reason for accepting the claim but doesn’t fully fill out why. More could be said about differences/similarities between scientific reasoning and other ways of knowing.	The comparison between the ways of supporting the claims is incomplete. It’s not made clear how the evidence is similar/different. Viewer is left wondering whether one set of evidence provides a better reason for accepting the claim and/or if so, why. Little is said about differences/similarities between scientific reasoning and other ways of knowing

Notes: