Scientific Method Rubric Name

Block
Date

Indicators Novice Apprentice Practitioner Expert
Organization Format demonstrates
minimal effort. Format
has numerous errors
and has many mistakes
such as out of order,
numbered incorrectly.
poor use of grammar.
No title.
Format lacks
neatness and
organization.
Mistakes made on
following the
scientific format.
For ex. out of
order, numbered
incorrectly etc)
Grammar
somewhat
confusing. Title
does not connect
to the experiment.
Format is easy to
read and follows
correct order and
guidelines. Few
(2-6) grammar
mistakes. Title is
included and
connects to the
experiment.
Format is well written and
follows correct order and
guidelines. Paper has been
proofread and grammar has
no more than one mistake.
Title relates to the
experiment.

Problem Problem is
missing/does not
clearly relate to the
experiment.
Problem is wordy
and confusing.
Does not use
question format.
Problem is
somewhat clear.
Somewhat relates
to the investigation.
Question format is
used.
Problem is clear and
completely relates to the
investigation. Question
format is used.
Hypothesis Hypothesis is
missing/does not use if
/then format.
Hypothesis does
not connect to the
problem.
Hypothesis is
confusing. If/then
are not used
correctly.
Hypothesis is
somewhat clear
and connects to
the problem. Uses
if or then
correctly.
Hypothesis is clear and well
thought out. Uses if/then
correctly.
Materials Materials are not listed
per line. Some
materials are missing.
Materials are
listed per line but
some are missing.
Materials are listed
per line but one or
two materials used
in the investigation
are missing.
Materials are listed per line
and all materials used in the
investigation are present.
Procedure Mostly
incomplete/missing
steps. Very confusing.
Some steps are
missing. Some
steps are out of
order and not
numbered.
Most steps are
clear and accurate.
Mostly numbered
and in single line
form.
All steps are clear and
accurate. Steps are numbered
and in single line form.

Observations
(Part A)
Observations may be
missing or incorrect.
Confusing, very little
effort.
Observations are
somewhat clear
and accurate.
Drawings are not
labeled and
somewhat neat.
Some use of color.
Observations are
clear and accurate.
Drawings are
mostly labeled and
somewhat neat.
Some use of color.
Observations are extremely
detailed. Drawings are
labeled and excellent use of
color.
Observations
(Part B)
No charts, graphs
included.
Chart graph
included but is
missing unit of
measurement,
title, no
ruler/pencil used.
Messy/confusing.
Chart /graph is
used to convey
information
clearly. Units of
measurement and
or title are missing.
Ruler/pencil used
but lacks neatness.
Chart/graph is extremely
detailed and organized. Units
of measurement and title are
included. Ruler/pencil used.
Extremely neat.
Conclusion The outcome of the
investigation is not
fully explained. No
connections to the
hypothesis. Does
explain what was
learned. Variables are
not mentioned.
The outcome of
the experiment
lacks a complete
explanation.
Hypothesis is
rejected or
accepted based on
observations/data.
Does not explain
what was learned.
No examples used
to support what
was learned.
Variables not fully
explained.
The outcome of the
experiment is clear
and fully
explained.
Hypothesis is
rejected or
accepted based on
observations/data.
Explains what was
learned. Uses
some examples
discussed in class
to support what
was learned.
Variables are
explained.
The outcome of the
experiment is extremely clear,
well-written and fully
explained. Hypothesis is
rejected or accepted based on
observations/data. Applies
what was learned outside
the classroom by using
original examples and or
information on the topic.
Variables are fully explained.