GRADUATE ATTRIBUTE

RUBRICS
FACULT Y OF ENGINEERING

Faculty of Engineering
 The University of Manitoba
Faculty of Engineering
Graduate Attribute Rubrics

June 2015

The Faculty of Engineering Graduate Attribute Rubrics are

intended as a pedagogical assessment tool for use by
University of Manitoba instructors of individual courses, as
well as for assessment at the program level, as applicable.
 Forward
The development of this document was initiated by the University of Manitoba Faculty Of Engineering,
and has been completed by Jillian Seniuk Cicek, PhD Candidate in Engineering Education, Paul
Labossiere, PhD, PEng, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, and Ken Ferens, PhD, PEng, Professor
Electrical and Computer Engineering.
We acknowledge the valuable contributions of Dr Sandra Ingram, Professor of Technical
Communications in Engineering and advisor to Jillian Seniuk Cicek. We also extend our profound
appreciation to the following Engineering Faculty: Dr Douglas Ruth, PEng, Design Chair and Dean
Emeritus, Dr Ian Jeffrey, PEng, Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Dr Anne Parker,
Professor of Technical Communications in Engineering, Ms. S. Norma Godavari, Head Librarian, Donald
W. Craik Engineering Library, Dr Jan Oleszkiewicz, PEng, Professor of Civil Engineering, and Dr Mark
Torchia, Director of the University of Manitoba Centre for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning,
who individually contributed their valuable time and expertise to numerous revisions of the rubrics.
Dr Ken Ferens lead the organizations of five successful Industry Forums; this effort facilitated the
invaluable discussions between Engineering Faculty and Manitoba Industry members for the purposes of
creating a common language via the rubrics. We are thankful to all participants of these Industry Forums,
including the members of the following Manitoba Engineering Industries:
AECL - Whiteshell Laboratories, AECOM, Bituminex Paving Ltd., Bockstael Construction Limited, Buhler
Versatile Inc., Crosier Kilgour & Partners Ltd., Director, Performance Engineering (Corporate), ERL Phase,
FWS Group of Companies, IDERS, IMT, Infomagnetics, Inland Pipe, Intelligent Hospital Systems, JCA
Electronics, JRS Mfg. Ltd., KGS Group, Lafarge, MacDon, Magellan Aerospace, Manitoba Hydro, Melet
Plastics Inc., MMM Group Limited, New Flyer, Norscan, NRC, PCL Constructors Canada Inc., Price
Industries Limited, Rogue Machines Inc., Seccuris Inc., Structures Solved Ltd., Terracon Development
Ltd., Tetratech, Vector Construction Ltd., Versatile, Virtuistic, and Wardrop.
As well we are also thankful to the following participants representing the Engineering Faculty: Anne
Parker, Norma Godavari, Danny Mann, Ian Jeffrey, Witold Kinsner, Dean McNeill, Douglas Ruth, Marolo
Alfaro, Dimos Polyzios, Ahmed Shalaby, Madjid Birouk, Yunhua Luo, Sherif Sherif, Carolyn Geddert and
Juan Abello.
Finally, we thankfully acknowledge the full support of Dr Jonathan Beaddoes, PhD, FCAE, for his
leadership in this successful initiative.
The use of the material in this booklet is allowed for educational/assessment purposes by universities
and industry as long as appropriate credits are given to the University of Manitoba Faculty of Engineering
in all publications arising from the use of Rubrics.

Nariman Sepehri, PhD, PEng, FCAE, FASME, FCSME, Associate Dean (Undergraduate)
JP Burak, MSc, PEng, Coordinator of Curriculum Management Curriculum
Faculty of Engineering, University of Manitoba
June 2015
Rubrics:
Rubrics are used for communicating the performance expectations for an activity. They are a way to
provide transparent criteria for assessment for all stakeholders (faculty, instructors, students, alumni and
Industry). Rubrics are descriptive, and thereby can be used as a tool to promote understanding, and to
direct future instruction and learning. They can also be used for self and peer evaluation.

Development and Aims:

The Faculty of Engineering Graduate Attribute Rubrics were developed collaboratively over the past year
with individuals from the Faculties of Engineering and Education, Engineering Industry, and the
University of Manitoba Centre for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning. Development was guided
by other rubric exemplars, with the aim to:
(i) Define foci and/or indicators for each graduate attribute;
(ii) Divide each indicator into 4 performance levels;
(iii) Target the level that indicates student competency.

Objectives:
The creation of the rubrics was directed with the following objectives:
(i) The foci and indicators adequately communicate the knowledge, skills, attitudes, values and behaviors
that University of Manitoba engineering stakeholders agree define each CEAB graduate attribute;
(ii) The competency level for each indicator is representative of what University of Manitoba engineering
stakeholders agree defines proficiency;
(iii) The language used in the rubrics is measurable, and consistent and agreeable to University of
Manitoba engineering stakeholders.

Purpose:
Rubrics are a tool conducive to outcomes-based education and assessment, a guiding principle for CEAB
accreditation. The Faculty of Engineering Graduate Attribute Rubrics rubrics can be used to facilitate a
common understanding and language for engineering stakeholders (faculty, instructors, students, alumni
and Industry) regarding the 12 CEAB graduate attributes. They are intended as a pedagogical assessment
tool for use by University of Manitoba instructors of individual courses, as well as for assessment at the
program level, as applicable.
 1. A Knowledge Base for Engineering: Demonstrated competence in university level mathematics, natural sciences, engineering fundamentals, and specialized
engineering knowledge appropriate to the program.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Mathematical and Scientific
Terms:
Ability to interpret (understand
and apply) mathematical and
scientific terms.
Theory in Engineering
Problems:
Ability to understand and apply
theory in engineering problems.
Mathematical Models:
Ability to apply mathematical
Knowledge Base for models to engineering problem
and/or formulate engineering
Engineering models.
Calculus and Linear Algebra:
Ability to apply calculus and/or
linear algebra to solve
engineering problems.
Assumptions and Limitations:
Ability to recognize
essential/critical assumptions
and limitations.
Calculations:
Ability to carry out calculations
and/or use mathematical
software.
Statistical Analysis:
Ability to use statistical concepts
to analyze data.
Interpretation of Data:
Ability to interpret
mathematical and/or visual
forms, including equations,
diagrams, graphics, figures and
tables.
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; and University of Delaware College of Engineering Civil & Environmental Engineering
ABET Scoring Rubrics for Program Outcomes: Outcome 1: An ability to apply math and science in engineering. Retrieved on October 9, 2013 from: http://www.ce.udel.edu/ABET/Current%20Documentation/ABET_scoring_rubrics_index.html
Level 4
Strong
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
interpret mathematical and
scientific terms correctly.
Demonstrates a comprehensive
understanding of underlying theory
and application to the problem.
Chooses an optimal mathematical
model that applies to an
engineering problem, and develops
new models.
Demonstrates comprehensive
application of calculus and/or
linear algebra to solve engineering
problems.
Evaluates assumptions
/limitations with complete and
persuasive rationale for their
appropriateness. Awareness that
conclusions may be limited by
their accuracy.
Demonstrates skillful ability to
carry out calculations. Calculations
are relevant, correct and
comprehensive, and are clearly
and concisely presented.
Mathematical software skillfully
used.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
use statistical concepts to analyze
data.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
provide rational explanations, and
on the basis of that information,
can make fitting inferences.
Page 1 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Demonstrates an ability to
interpret most mathematical and
scientific terms correctly.
Demonstrates an ability to
understand the application of
theory to the problem.
Chooses a mathematical model
that applies to an engineering
problem, and has some success in
model development.
Demonstrates the ability to apply
calculus and/or linear algebra in
solving engineering problems.
Describes assumptions/limitations
and offers complete rationale for
why they are appropriate.
Demonstrates ability to carry out
calculations. Calculations are
relevant and correct.
Mathematical software used
successfully.
Demonstrates an ability to use
statistical concepts to analyze
data.
Demonstrates an ability to provide
rational explanations of
mathematical and/or visual forms.
Level 2
Developing
Demonstrates some ability to
interpret mathematical and
scientific terms correctly.
Demonstrates some ability to
understand the application of
theory to the problem.
Chooses a mathematical model
that applies to an engineering
problem, but requires assistance in
model development.
Demonstrates some understanding
of applications of calculus and/or
linear algebra in solving
engineering problems.
Describes assumptions/limitations,
and offers some rationale for why
they are appropriate.
Demonstrates some ability to carry
out calculations. Only part of the
relevent calculations are done,
and may contain errors.
Mathematical software used with
some success.
Demonstrates some ability to use
statistical concepts to analyze
data. Some errors in analysis.
Demonstrates some ability to
provide explanations of
mathematical and/or visual forms,
and makes occasional mistakes.
Level 1
Needs Work
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
interpret mathematical and scientific
terms correctly.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
understand the application of theory
to the problem.
Demonstrates minimal or no
understanding of the connection
between mathematical models and
engineering problems.
Demonstrates minimal or no
understanding of applications of
calculus and linear algebra in solving
engineering problems.
Attempts to describe
assumptions/limitations, but no
rationale given.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
carry out calculations. Calculations
attempted are wrong or irrelevant.
Mathematical software used with no
success.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
use statistical concepts to analyze
data. Major errors in analysis.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
provide explanation of mathematical
and/or visual forms. Frequently
misinterprets the information
presented.
 2. Problem Analysis: An ability to use appropriate knowledge and skills to identify, formulate, analyze, and solve complex engineering problems in order to
reach substantiated conclusions.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Identify/Define Problem:
Ability to identify and/or
articulate a problem.
Contextualize Problem:
Ability to understand the
problem within a larger context
(problem within a problem).
Formulate Strategies for
Solving a Problem:
Ability to identify strategies for
solving problems (brainstorming,
research, trial and error).
Recognize and Consider
Assumptions:
Ability to recognize and consider
assumptions when solving a
problem.
Practical Problem
Propose/Create Multiple
Solving
Solutions:
Ability to propose solutions to
address the problem and/or
create/play with solutions.
Analyze, Evaluate and Select
Solutions:
Ability to analyze, evaluate and
select optimal/practical
solution, including feasibility
and impact.
Implement Solutions:
Ability to implement a practical
solution to address the problem.
Evaluate Solution
Implementation:
Ability to evaluate solution
implementation and impact
(performance, limitations, risk,
cost (time and money),
consequences of failure, risk).
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Level 4
Strong
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
identify/articulate a problem that is
strongly supported and clearly linked
to the issues at hand.
Demonstrates a comprehensive and
insightful understanding of how the
problem fits within the larger context.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
identify multiple strategies for
generating approaches to solve a
problem, and has insight into the pros
and cons of those strategies.
Demonstrates skillful recognition and
consideration of important
assumptions when solving a problem.
Evaluates and/or understands the
consequences of them.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
propose multiple solutions that
indicate a deep understanding of the
problem. Skillful ability to create/play
with new and innovative solutions.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
analysis, evaluate and select
optimal/practical solution. Thorough
and insightful explanation of feasibility
and impact.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
implement a practical solution.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
evaluate solution implementation with
comprehensive and/or insightful
consideration of impact.
Page 2 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Demonstrates ability to
identify/articulate a problem that
is clearly linked to the issues at
hand.
Demonstrates a clear
understanding of how the problem
fits within the larger context.
Demonstrates an ability to identify
an appropriate strategy for
generating approaches for solving
a problem.
Demonstrates recognition and
consideration of important
assumptions when solving a
problem.
Demonstrates an ability to propose
multiple solutions that indicate
comprehension of the problem.
Ability to create/play with new
solutions.
Demonstrates an ability to
analyze, evaluate and select
optimal/practical solution. Clear
explanation of feasibility and
impact.
Demonstrates an ability to
implement a practical solution.
Demonstrates an ability to
evaluate solution implementation
with consideration of impact.
Level 2
Developing
Demonstrates some ability to
identify/articulate a problem that is
partially connected to the issues at
hand.
Demonstrates some understanding of
how the problem fits within the
larger context.
Demonstrates some ability to
identify a strategy for generating an
approach for solving the problem.
Strategy may or may not be
appropriate.
Demonstrates some recognition and
consideration of important
assumptions when solving a problem.
Demonstrates some ability to
propose a few solutions that indicate
some comprehension of the
problem. Some ability to
create/play with new solutions.
Demonstrates some ability to
analyze, evaluate and select
optimal/practical solution. Partial
explanation of feasibility and
impact.
Demonstrates some ability to
implement a practical solution.
Demonstrates some ability to
evaluate solution implementation,
with some consideration of impact.
Level 1
Needs Work
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
identify/articulate a problem.
Demonstrates no understanding of how
the problem fits within the larger
context.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
identify a strategy for generating an
approach for solving a problem.
Demonstrates minimal or no
recognition and consideration of
assumptions when solving a problem.
Proposes solutions that indicate
minimal or no comprehension of the
problem. Minimal ability to create/play
with new solutions.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
analyze, evaluate or select
optimal/practical solution. Little or no
explanation of feasibility and impact.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
implement a practical solution.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
evaluate solution implementation, with
minimal or no consideration of impact.
 3. Investigation: An ability to conduct investigations of complex problems by methods that include appropriate experiments, analysis and interpretation of data and
synthesis of information in order to reach valid conclusions.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Identifying Problems for
Investigation:
Ability to identify
problems/issues/topics for
investigation.
Collection of Background
Information:
Ability to gather background
information (existing
knowledge, research, and/or
indications of the problem).
Procedure:
Ability to select OR ability
to develop a methodology or
theoretical framework to
investigate a problem.
Examination and
Evaluation
Organizing Evidence:
Ability to organize evidence
to demonstrate patterns,
and highlight differences
and/or similarities.
Conclusions and
Recommendations:
Ability to state conclusions
and make recommendations
as a result of the
investigation.
Limitations and
Implications:
Ability to identify
limitations and implications.
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Level 4
Strong
Identifies relevant
problems/issues/topics with
minimal or no orientation, and is
able to select those that are
pertinant/critical for
investigation.
Collects sufficient relevant
background information from
appropriate sources, and is able
to identify pertinant/critical
information.
Selects/develops an optimal
methodology or theoretical
framework.
For experimental procedures, see Experimental Methods Rubric
Organizes evidence with
perception, demonstrating
patterns, and highlighting
differences and/or similarities
integral to the investigation.
States logical conclusions and
makes insightful
recommendations, and identifies
those that are pertinent/critical.
Identifies all significant
limitations and implications.
Page 3 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Identifies relevant
problems/issues/topics with
minimal orientation, that
require investigation.
Collects sufficient relevant
background information from
appropriate sources.
Selects/develops an
appropriate methodology or
theoretical framework.
Organizes evidence to
demonstrate patterns,
differences and/or similarities
important to the
investigation.
States logical conclusions and
makes appropriate
recommendations.
Identifies many important
limitations and implications.
Level 2
Developing
Some ability to identify
problems/issues/topics that
may or may not require
investigation.
Collects some relevant
background information from
appropriate sources.
Selects/develops a methodology
or theoretical framework that is
somewhat appropriate.
Organizes evidence in a way
that is somewhat effective in
demonstrating patterns,
differences, and/or similarities
that are applicable to the
investigation.
States conclusions and makes
recommendations that may or
may not be relevant to the
investigation.
Identifies some limitations and
implications.
Level 1
Needs Work
Minimal or no ability to identify
problems/issues/topics that may
or may not require investigation.
Minimal or no ability to collect
relevant background information.
Minimal or no ability to
select/develop a methodology or
theoretical framework.
Minimal or no ability to organize
evidence.
Minimal or no ability to state
conclusions or make
recommendations.
Minimal or no ability to identify
limitations or implications.
 3. Investigation: An ability to conduct investigations of complex problems by methods that include appropriate experiments, analysis and interpretation of data and synthesis of
information in order to reach valid conclusions.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Lab Preparation:
Ability to gather materials and
record on lab report.
Purpose:
Ability to state the hypothesis
and the research question,
clarify the connection between
them, and identify the variables.
Procedure:
Ability to follow experimental
procedures, control variables,
and record procedural steps
on lab report.
Data/Evidence Collection:
Ability to record raw
data/evidence.
Experimental Methods
Data Presentation and Error
Analysis:
Ability to present data using
charts, tables and/or graphs to
enable comprehension and
interpretation, including error
analysis.
Evaluation of Experiment:
Ability to interpret findings,
compare them to values in the
literature, identify weaknesses
and limitations, and propose
improvements.
Courtesy and Safety:
Ability to be courteous to
others, attentive to safety, and
tidy in the lab.
Experimental Methods Rubric adapted from: Rubric for Conducting an Experiment in the Lab (From Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2005). Introduction to Rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback and promote student
learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing; pp. 96-97.) Retrieved on October 8, 2013 from http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/teaching/commenting/experiment.cfm
Level 4
Strong
Exemplary materials are gathered and
recorded on the lab report with clarity
and concision.
The hypothesis and research question
are skillfully specified, and the
connection between the two is
explained in depth. The variables are
identified and discussed.
The procedure is efficienty followed
and student skillfully controls all
chosen variables. All procedural steps
are clearly and concisely recorded on
lab report.
Raw data/evidence, as well as units,
are skillfully recorded. The data table
is clearly and concisely, and/or
creatively labeled and formatted.
Data are presented in ways to best
enable comprehension and
interpretation, skillfully incorporating
error analysis.
The findings are interpreted
insightfully, and skillfully compared
with values in the literature.
Weaknesses and limitations are
analyzed and creative
recommendations are made to address
them.
While working in the lab, the student
demonstrates exemplary behaviour in
courtesy and safefy, and leaves the
area spotless.
Page 4 of 16
Level 3
Competent
All required materials are
gathered and recorded on the lab
report. The selected materials are
suitable for the procedure.
The hypothesis and research
question are specified clearly, and
the connection between the two is
explained. The variables are
identified.
The procedure is well followed and
student demonstrates control of
all chosen variables. All procedural
steps are recorded on the lab
report.
Raw data/evidence, as well as
units, are appropriately and
clearly recorded. The data table is
appropriately labeled and
formatted.
Data are presented in ways to
enable comprehension and
interpretation, incorporating error
analysis.
The findings are interpreted and
compared with values in the
literature. Weaknesses and
limitations are considered and
recommendations are made to
address them.
While working in the lab, the
student is attentive to safety,
respectful to instructors and
peers, and neat, cleaning the area
before leaving.
Level 2
Developing
Most required materials are
gathered; not all may be recorded
on the lab report. The selected
materials are adequate for the
procedure.
The hypothesis and research
question are specified, and the
connection between the two is
somewhat clear. Most variables are
identified.
The procedure could be better
followed, but student controls all
chosen variables. Most procedural
steps are recorded on the lab
report.
Raw data/evidence, as well as units,
are recorded although not as clearly
or suitably as they might be. The
data table may lack appropriate
labels and/or format.
Data are presented in ways that
somewhat aid comprehension and
interpretation and incorporate error
analysis, but presentation could be
clearer.
The findings are interpreted and
compared with values in the
literature, but not as fully or clearly
as they might be. Not all of the
weaknesses or limitations are
discussed; few recommendations are
made to address them.
While working in the lab, the
student is mostly attentive to safety,
respectful to instructors and peers,
and neat, Might need reminders to
leave the area clean.
Level 1
Needs Work
All required materials are not
gathered, nor recorded on the lab
report. The selected materials are not
all adequate and/or suitable for the
procedure.
The hypothesis and research question
are not specified clearly, and the
connection between the two is vague
or missing. Most variables are not
identified.
The procedure is inadequately
followed, and student does not control
chosen variables. Many procedural
steps are not entered on the lab
report.
Raw data/evidence, as well as units,
are not recorded suitably. The data
table is not labeled and/or formatted.
Data are not presented clearly. Error
analysis is wrong or missing.
The interpretation of the findings is
illogical, and the findings are not
compared with values in the literature.
Few or no weaknesses or limitations
are discussed; few or no
recommendations are made to address
them.
While working in the lab, the student is
unattentive to safety, disrespectful to
others, and messy, leaving the area
untidy even after being reminded.
 4. Design: An ability to design solutions for complex, open-ended engineering problems and to design systems, components or processes that meet specified
needs with appropriate attention to health and safety risks, applicable standards, and economic, environmental, cultural and societal considerations.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Understanding the Design
Process:
Ability to explain the design
process including the importance
of needs, specifications, concept
generation, selection and
evaluation.
Problem Solving: Considering
Solutions:
Ability to develop an approach
to solve a problem.
Design Process
Implementing Design Strategy:
Ability to execute a solution to
an open-ended problem taking
into consideration design
requirements and pertinent
contextual elements.
Evaluating Final Design:
Ability to evaluate/confirm the
functioning of the final design.
Innovation:
Ability to recognize and
incorporate innovation when
considering an idea.
Connecting and Integrating:
Ability to connect, integrate and
transform ideas into solutions.
Creative Thinking
Exploring New Directions:
Ability to incorporate new ideas,
ways or tactics (alternate,
divergent, contradictory and/or
potentially high risk perspectives
or ideas) when developing a
design/approaching an
assignment.
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Level 4
Strong
Demonstrates a comprehensive
ability to understand and explain a
design process.
Considers multiple approaches to
solving a problem, and develops a
logical, consistent plan.
Recognizes consequences of
solution and can articulate reason
for choosing solution.
Demonstrates a skillful
(thorough/insightful/creative)
ability to execute a solution taking
into consideration all design
requirements and pertinent
contextual elements.
Demonstrates a skillful (thorough
/insightful) ability to
evaluate/confirm the functioning
of the final design, with
deliberation for further
improvement.
Demonstrates a comprehensive
recognition and incorporation of
innovation when considering an
idea.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
connect, integrate and transform
innovative ideas into innovative
solutions.
Demonstrates an ability to actively
pursue and evaluate new ideas,
ways or tactics beyond the
guidelines of the assignment, while
considering risks.
Page 5 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Demonstrates an ability to
understand and explain a design
process.
Considers multiple approaches to
solving a problem, which is
justified and considers
consequences.
Demonstrates an ability to execute
a solution taking into
consideration design requirements
and some contextual elements.
Demonstrates an ability to
evaluate/confirm the functioning
of the final design. The evaluation
is complete and has sufficient
depth.
Demonstrates an ability to
recognize and incorporate
innovation when considering an
idea.
Demonstrates an ability to
connect, integrate and transform
ideas into solutions.
Demonstrates an abilty to identify
and evaluate new ideas, ways or
tactics within the guidelines of the
assignment, while considering
some risks.
Level 2
Developing
Demonstrates some ability to
understand and explain a design
process.
Considers a few approaches to
solving a problem; doesn't always
consider consequences.
Demonstrates some ability to
execute a solution that attends to
the problem, but omits some
design requirements and/or
pertinent contextual elements.
Demonstrates some ability to
evaluate/confirm the functioning
of the final design, but the
evaluation lacks depth and/or is
incomplete.
Demonstrates some recognition
and incorporation of innovation
when considering an idea.
Demonstrates some ability to
connect, integrate and transform
ideas into solutions.
Demonstates some ability to out
identify/or evaluate new ideas,
ways or tactics within the
guidelines of the assignment.
Level 1
Needs Work
Demonstrates minimal or no ability
to understand and explain a design
process.
Considers a single approach to
solving a problem. Does not
consider consequences.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability
to execute a solution. Solution
does not directly attend to the
problem.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability
to evaluate/confirm the
functioning of the final design.
Demonstrates minimal or no
recognition of innovation when
considering an idea.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability
to connect, integrate and
transform ideas into solutions.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability
to identify or evaluate new ideas,
ways or tactics.
 5. Use of Engineering Tools: An ability to select, apply, adapt, extend and create appropriate tools (resources, software, techniques, hardware, equipment) to a
range of engineering activities, from simple to complex, with an understanding of the associated limitations.

Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

Focus Areas INDICATORS
Strong Competent Developing Needs Work
Understand Tools: Demonstrates skillful ability to Demonstrates ability to Demonstrates some ability to Demonstrates minimal or no
Ability to describe and describe and explain the describe and explain the describe and/or explain the ability to describe and/or explain
explain the principles behind principles behind and applicability principles behind and principles behind and the principles behind and
and applicability of of engineering tools. applicability of engineering applicability of engineering applicability of engineering tools.
engineering tools. tools. tools.

Identify and Use Tools:
Ability to identify and use
relevant tools for an
engineering activity.
Use of Engineering
Tools
Demonstrates skillful ability to
identify and use the most
relevant tools for a range of
engineering activities.
Demonstrates an ability to
identify and use relevant tools
for an engineering activity.
Demonstrates some ability to
identify and use tools for an
engineering activity, but may
not identify the most relevant
tool.
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to identify or use tools for
an engineering activity.

Create Tools: Demonstrates skillful ability to Demonstrates an ability to Demonstrates some ability to Demonstrates minimal or no
Ability to create engineering create engineering tools. create engineering tools. create engineering tools with ability to create engineering tools.
tools. guidance.

Evaluate Tools:
Ability to identify the
limitations in the use of
engineering tools, and their
underlying assumptions.
Demonstrates skillful ability to Demonstrates the ability to Demonstrates some ability to Demonstrates minimal or no
evaluate the limitations of tools identify the limitations of identify the limitations of tools ability to identify the limitations
and discusses the assumptions. tools and understands the and some understanding of the of tools and understand the
assumptions. assumptions. assumptions.

Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Page 6 of 16
 6. Individual and Teamwork: An ability to work effectively as a member and leader in teams, including in multidisciplinary settings.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Individual Idea Contributions:
Ability to contribute useful ideas to
advance work of team.
Individual Work Contributions:
Ability to carry out individual
responsibilities.
Individual Individual Preparation and/or
Contributions Within Contribution to Team Meetings:
a Team Ability to prepare and/or to contribute
to team meetings.
Time Management:
Ability to manage time (estimate,
prioritize, establish deadlines/
milestones, follow timeline, plan for
contingencies, adapt to change).
Credit and Accountability:
Ability to share credit and accept
accountability when working in a team.
Leadership Skills:
Ability to lead a team. (i) Mentors and
accepts mentoring from others.
(ii) Demonstrates capacity for initiative while
respecting others' roles. (iii) Facilitates others'
involvment. (iv) Evaluates team effectiveness
and plans for improvements.
Working with Others:
Ability to listen to, collaborate with,
and champion the efforts of others.
Promoting Positive Team Atmosphere:
Ability to foster a positive and
productive team atmosphere and keep
team members working together.
(i) Is courteous and respectful with team
members; (ii) Demonstrates a positive attitude
Team Skills using verbal and non-verbal cues, and tone.
(iii) Inspires team members; (iv) Helps and
encourages team members.
Addresses Conflict:
Ability to identify, respond to and
resolve potentially damaging conflict
among team members.
Management of Multidisciplinary
Teams:
Ability to appreciate, understand and
work with multidisciplinary team
members.
Rubrics informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; and University of Delaware College of Engineering Civil & Environmental Engineering
ABET Scoring Rubrics for Program Outcomes: Outcome 11: The ability to function on (multidisciplinary) teams. Retrieved on October 9, 2013 from: http://www.ce.udel.edu/ABET/Current%20Documentation/ABET_scoring_rubrics_index.htm
Level 4
Strong
Routinely contributes useful ideas to
advance the work of team.
Designated jobs are accomplished by
deadline; completed work is carefully
and meticulously prepared and meets
all requirements.
Thoroughly and carefully prepared for
team meetings. Contributes by sharing
information and knowledge.
Demonstrates the ability to manage
time, including communicating and/or
reacting and adapting to changes.
Shares credit and always accepts
accountability.
Exemplifies leadership skills.
Skillfully listens to, collaborates with,
and champions the efforts of others.
Always upholds and promotes a
constructive team atmosphere by
exhibiting courtesy, respect and a
positive attitude, and by offering
motivation and assistance. Works
tirelessly to try to keep people
working well together.
Identifies and responds to negative
conflict in a prompt and helpful
manner. Fortifies team relations and
productivity through skillful conflict
mediation.
Has great appreciation for and
understanding of disciplines outside of
own. Works profitably with
multidisciplinary team members.
Page 7 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Contributes useful ideas to
advance the work of the team.
Designated jobs are accomplished
by deadline; completed work
meets requirements.
Prepared for team meetings.
Provides contributions.
Demonstrates the ability to
manage time, including
communicating and/or reacting to
changes.
Shares credit and accepts
accountability.
Demonstrates leadership skills.
Listens to, collaborates with, and
champions the efforts of others.
Promotes a constructive team
atmosphere by exhibiting
courtesy, respect and a positive
attitude, and by offering
motivation and assistance. Tries to
keep people working together.
Identifies and responds to
negative conflict, and is able to
mediate it.
Has appreciation for and
understanding of disciplines
outside of own. Works effectively
with multidisciplinary team
members.
Level 2
Developing
Sometimes contributes useful ideas
to advance work of team.
Designated jobs are accomplished by
deadline; completed work meets
most requirements.
Usually prepared for team meetings.
Provides some contributions.
Demonstrates some ability to
manage time.
Sometimes shares credit and accepts
accountability.
Demonstrates some leadership skills
at times.
Sometimes listens to, collaborates
with, and champions others' efforts.
Sometimes promotes a constructive
team atmosphere by exhibing
courtesy, respect and a positive
attitude, and offering motivation
and assistance. At times tries to
keep people working together.
Sometimes identifies conflict and
tries to manage it.
Has some appreciation for and
understanding of disciplines outside
of own, but works less effectively
with multidisciplinary team
members.
Level 1
Needs Work
Rarely contributes useful ideas to
advance the work of the team.
Some designated jobs are
accomplished by deadline;
completed work meets some
requirements.
Routinely fails to prepare for team
meetings. Provides little or no
contributions.
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to manage time.
Has difficulty or does not share
credit or accept accountability.
Demonstrates minimal or no
leadership skills.
Rarely listens to, collaborates
with, or champions others' efforts.
Rarely supports a constructive
team climate with regards to
courtesy, respect, attitude,
motivation and assistance. Does
not try to keep people working
together.
Rarely identifies and/or addresses
conflict.
Has no appreciation for or
understanding of disciplines
outside of own. Is unable to work
effectively with multidisciplinary
team members.
7. Communication Skills: An ability to communicate complex engineering concepts within the profession and with society at large. Such ability includes reading,
writing, speaking and listening, and the ability to comprehend and write effective reports and design documentation, and to give and effectively respond to clear
instructions.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Purpose:
Ability to identify the reason for
the communication, choose the
best communication for the task,
and use the purpose to guide the
communication.
Main Idea:
Ability to communicate the main
idea.
Supporting Materials:
Ability to use information
sources (texts, journals,
research) and/or generate
materials (examples, statistics,
analogies) to support the
purpose and main idea, and
Technical establish credibiity.
Communication Skills Organization:
Ability to structure ideas to
move logically forward.
E.g., For written communication
both macro (introduction,
paragraphs, sequence of content,
conclusion) and micro
organization (sentences,
transitions) are considered.
Tailoring Communication:
Ability to use language that is
appropriate for:
(i) the genre (written, verbal or
electronic communications, i.e.,
texts & emails); (ii) the target
audience; (iii) the
company/persons that the
communicator is representing.
Clarity and Conciseness:
Ability to use language that
clearly and concisely conveys
meaning and supports the
purpose of the work.
Mechanics:
Ability to use language that is
mechanically correct
(punctuation, spelling,
grammar).
Genre and Conventions:
Ability to understand and use
conventions intrinsic to
engineering genres
(formal/informal reports, lab
reports, final completion
reports, proposals,
presentations).
Level 4
Strong
Purpose is clear and effectively guides
the communication. Choice of
communication is optimal.
Main idea is clearly and precisely
stated.
Demonstrates skillful use of superior,
trustworthy, pertinent and compelling
materials that support the purpose and
main idea.
Materials are seamlessly arranged in a
logical sequence and both macro and
micro elements enhance the work and
the reader's comprehension.
Communication is skillfully crafted to
suit the genre, the level of target
audience, and the company/persons
represented.
Uses language that conveys meaning
with clarity and parsimony, and
enhances the purpose of the work.
Communication contains very few or
no errors.
Demonstrates thorough/sophisticated
understanding of and skillful use of the
conventions inherent within the
engineering genre.
Page 8 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Purpose is evident, and mostly
guides the communication. Choice
of communication is effective.
Main idea is understandable.
Demonstrates consistent use of
trustworthy, appropriate and
pertinent materials that support
the purpose and main idea.
Material moves logically forward,
and both macro and micro
elements are clear, coherent, and
easy to follow.
Communication is suitable for the
genre, the target audience and the
company/persons represented.
Uses language that clearly and
concisely conveys meaning, and
supports the purpose of the work.
Communication contains some
errors, but errors do not detract
from meaning.
Demonstrates understanding of
and use of the conventions
inherent within the engineering
genre.
Level 2
Developing
Purpose is somewhat clear and
somewhat guides the
communication. Choice of
communication is somewhat
effective.
Main idea is somewhat
understandable.
Demonstrates an attempt to use
trustworthy, appropriate and
pertinent materials that support and
develop the purpose and main idea.
Materical has some logical order and
is somewhat coherent or easy to
follow.
Some consideration of the genre,
the target audience and the
company/persons represented are
taken within the communication.
Communication may contain some
detail or technical content that are
unsuitable.
Uses language that generally
conveys meaning, is somewhat
concise, and supports the purpose of
the work.
Communication contains errors.
Errors may be distracting.
Demonstrates some understanding of
and attempts to use the conventions
inherent within the engineering
genre.
Level 1
Needs Work
Purpose is unclear. Does not guide the
communication. Choice of
communication is ineffective.
Main idea is difficult to understand.
Demonstrates minimal or no attempt to
use trustworthy, appropriate and
pertinent materials to support the
purpose and/or main idea.
Material has little logical order, and is
often unclear, inconherent and difficult
to follow.
Minimal or no consideration of the
genre, the target audience or the
company/persons represented is taken
within the communication.
Communication contains details or
technical content that are unsuitable.
Uses language that may be unclear
and/or inconcise, may sometimes
impede meaning, and minimally
supports the purpose of the work.
Communication contains many errors.
Errors impede meaning.
Demonstrates minimal or no
understanding of or effort to use the
conventions inherent within the
engineering genre.

Visuals for Written
Communication
General Communication
Skills
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; University of Delaware College of Engineering
Civil & Environmental Engineering ABET Scoring Rubrics for Program Outcomes: Outcome 12a: An ability to communicate effectively (written). Retrieved on October 9, 2013 from:
http://www.ce.udel.edu/ABET/Current%20Documentation/ABET_scoring_rubrics_index.html; and Listening 2010 Waypoint Outcomes. All rights reserved. Retrieved from http://rubriclibrary.com/assessment-methodologies/course-embedded-
assessment/basic-listening-rubric/
Illustrations (Graphs, Tables,
Figures and Diagrams):
Ability to use illustrations
properly to support ideas
(citations, position on page,
integration, design and support
of ideas).
Formatting/Layout/Design of
Communication:
Ability to use appropriate or
precribed format, which is
effectively designed, clearly
labeled, neatly and
professionally presented.
Active Listening:
Ability to pay attention to a
speaker, summarize key ideas
and supporting information.
Following Instructions:
Ability to follow instructions
(spoken and/or written).
Giving/Writing Instructions:
Ability to give/write clear
directions or instructions, convey
the sequence of steps and use
clear examples/references.
Asking Questions:
Ability to recognize and/or
construct meaningful and
relevant questions.
Illustrations are skillfully used to
support ideas (correctly cited,
skillfully positioned on page, well
integrated and designed; they enhance
points, explain, interpret, and assess
information).
The appropriate/prescribed format is
precisely followed. Design is
exemplary. Headings are clear and add
to the overall meaning of, and/or
enhance the communication. Work is
exceptionally neat and professionally
presented. Format compels reading.
Demonstrates skillful ability to actively
listen by rephrasing/repeating all of
the speaker's key ideas and supporting
information.
Is able to concisely and effectively
follow spoken and/or written
instructions.
Gives/writes clear and concise
directions or instructions. Skillfully
conveys the sequence of steps and
uses model examples/references.
Listener/reader easily and smoothly
follows instructions.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
recognize and construct meaningful
and relevant questions.
Page 9 of 16
Illustrations are properly used to
support ideas (correctly cited,
positioned on page, integrated and
designed; they support, explain
and interpret information).
The appropriate/
prescribedformat is followed.
Design is effective; headings are
clear, and work is neatly and
professionally presented. Format
invites reading.
Demonstrates ability to actively
listen by rephrasing/repeating
most of the speaker's key ideas
and supporting information.
Is able to follow spoken and/or
written instructions.
Gives/writes clear directions or
instructions. Conveys the
sequence of steps and uses clear
examples/references.
Listener/reader can follow the
instructions.
Demonstrates an ability to
recognize and construct
meaningful and/or relevant
questions.
Illustrations are for the most part
properly used to support ideas (an
attempt is made to correctly cite,
position on page, integrate, and/or
design, and to support, explain or
interpret information).
The appropriate/ prescribed format
is followed in most portions of the
communication. Design is somewhat
effective; headings are somewhat
clear, and work is for the most part,
neatly presented.
Demonstrates some ability to
actively listen by
rephrasing/repeating some of the
speaker's key ideas and supporting
information.
Is partially able to follow spoken
and/or written instructions.
Gives/writes somewhat clear
directions or instructions. Generally
conveys the sequence of steps; uses
some examples/references.
Listener/reader can for the most
part follow the instructions.
Demonstrates some ability to
recognize and/or construct
meaningful or relevant questions.
Illustrations are used, but minimally
support ideas, and are not properly
cited, positioned on page, integrated
and/or designed. They do not support,
explain or interpret information.
The appropriate/ prescribed format is
not followed. Design of communication
is ineffective; headings are unclear,
and work is not neatly presented.
Format does not invite reading.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
actively listen to the speaker. Is unable
to rephrase/repeat key ideas and/or
supporting information. May be
distracting to others.
Is unable to follow spoken and/or
written instructions.
Gives/writes unclear directions or
instructions. For the most part does
not convey the sequence of steps. Uses
few or no examples/references.
Listener/reader has difficulty following
the instructions.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
recognize or construct meaningful or
relevant questions. May not be inclined
to ask questions.
7. Communication Skills: An ability to communicate complex engineering concepts within the profession and with society at large. Such ability includes reading, writing, speaking
and listening, and the ability to comprehend and write effective reports and design documentation, and to give and effectively respond to clear instructions.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Key Ideas: Organization and
Articulation
Ability to present strong key ideas
and supporting details with clarity
and concision (logical sequencing,
clear transitions between points,
introduction, supporting details and
summary).
Tailoring Communication:
Ability to use language that is
appropriate for:
(i) the target audience;
(ii) the company/persons that the
communicator is representing.
Communication Time Management:
Skills for Oral Ability to complete presentation in
the time allocated.
Reports
Delivery (verbal):
Ability to use diction, enunciation,
volume, pacing to effectively
deliver the presentation.
Delivery (non-verbal):
Evidence of Preparation:
Ability of presenter to:
Speak easily with few aids
(notecards/slides)
Control posture and gestures
Position oneself in relation to
audience, podium and slides
Control distractions (nervous habits,
stall words)
Audience Rapport:
Ability of presenter to:
Sustain eye contact
Scan audience
Visual Aids:
Ability to design, use and integrate
visual aids (slides, illustrations,
props, demonstrations) that
effectively support and focus the
presentation.
Appearance/Attire of Presenter:
Ability to adopt an
appearance/attire that is
appropriate to the presentation.
Q & A with Audience:
Ability to transition from
presentation, listen to, answer and
manage questions from the
audience.
Rubric informed by: University of Delaware College of Engineering Civil & Environmental Engineering ABET Scoring Rubrics for Program Outcomes: Outcome 12a: An ability to communicate effectively (written) and Outcome 12b: An ability to communicated effectively (oral). Retrieved on
October 9, 2013 from: http://www.ce.udel.edu/ABET/Current%20Documentation/ABET_scoring_rubrics_index.html; and by Dr. Anne Parker and Aidan Topping, Faculty of Engineering, University of Manitoba, 2014.
Level 4
Strong
Presentation logically and skillfully
structured. Key ideas are compelling,
and articulated with exceptional clarity
and concision. Introduction, supporting
details and summary are clearly evident
and memorable, and ascertain the
credibility of the speaker.
Communication is skillfully crafted to
suit level of target audience and is
appropriate for company/persons
represented.
Presentation fits perfectly within time
constraint.
Delivery makes the presentation
compelling.
Excellent delivery:
Sustained and comfortable eye
contact
Can be clearly heard
Speaks confidently with few aids
Does not block screen
No distracting, nervous habits
Speaker is polished
Visual aids are skillfully/creatively
designed, skillfully used and seamlessly
integrated into the presentation. The
presentation looks polished and
professional.
Professional appearance/attire that is
well suited for presentation.
Seamless transition from presentation to
Q & A. Skillfully manages and responds to
questions; gauges questioners'
understanding; is able to clarify answers
for diverse audiences and objectives.
Page 10 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Presentation has clear structure and is
easy to follow. Key ideas are clearly and
concisely articulated, and are
interesting. There is sufficient detail to
ascertain speaker's authority, and
presentation includes an introduction
and summary.
Communicator takes into consideration
the target audience and
company/persons represented.
Communication contains details and/or
technical content that are suitable for
level of target audience.
Presentation fits within time constraint,
though presenter might have to subtely
rush or slow down.
Delivery makes the presentation
interesting.
Good delivery:
Makes eye contact
Can be heard easily
Speaks comfortably with some aids
Does not block screen
No distracting nervous habits
Speaker appears comfortable
Visual aids are well designed, used and
integrated into the presentation. The
presentation looks professional.
Appearance/attire is appropriate for
presentation.
Smooth transition from presentation to Q
& A. Listens carefully and responds
courteously, knowledgeably and clearly
to questions.
Level 2
Developing
Presentation has some structure. Key
ideas generally identifiable, although
not very remarkable. Introduction,
supporting details and/or summary
may be too broad, too detailed or
missing. Credibility of the speaker may
be questionable at times.
Communicator takes some
consideration of the target audience
and company/persons represented.
Communication may still contain some
detail or technical content that are
unsuitable for level of target audience.
Presentation does not quite fit within
time constraint; presenter has to rush
or slow down at end.
Delivery makes the presentation
understandable.
Has minor difficulties with non-verbal
delivery of presentation:
Effort to maintain eye contact
At times difficult to hear or understand
May overuse/underuse aids
At times hesitates, makes mistakes, or
loses place; presentation seems
memorized
At times blocks screen
Displays nervous habits (pauses, tapping,
um-ing etc.)
Speaker appears tentative
Visual aids are somewhat well
designed, used and integrated into the
presentation. The presentation looks
somewhat professional.
Appearance/attire is not quite
appropriate for the presentation.
Some ability to transition from
presentation to Q & A. Understands
most questions, responds somewhat
knowledgeably and/or somewhat
succinctly.
Level 1
Needs Work
Presentation rambles. Not organized;
key ideas are difficult to identify, and
are unremarkable. No clear
introduction, supporting details and
summary. Speaker has no credibility.
Communicator takes minimal or no
consideration of the target audience or
company/persons represented.
Communication may contain details or
technical content that are unsuitable
for level of target audience.
Presentation is unsuitablably short or
unreasonably long.
Delivery detracts from the
presentation.
Major difficulties with the non-verbal
delivery of the presentation.
Sporadic or no eye contact
Hard to understand or hear
Uses aids excessively or not at all
Reads from paper
Stands in front of screen
Nervous habits are distracting
(pauses, tapping, um-ing
etc.)
Speaker appears uncomfortable.
Visual aids poorly designed (difficult to
read; poor level of detail; missing
captions or labels; misspelled words),
and poorly used/overused. The
presentation looks unprofessional.
Little or no consideration of
appearance/attire taken.
Minimal or abrupt transition from
presentation. May not actively listen to
questions, or provide knowledgeable
answers, and/or may be unable to
answer questions succinctly.
 8. Professionalism: An understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the Professional Engineer in society, especially the primary role of protection
of the public and the public interest.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Behaviour and
Responsibility:
Ability to exhibit
appropriate behaviour and
assume responsibility for
own actions.
APEGM Code of Ethics and
Professional Engineering
Act of Manitoba:
Awareness and
understanding of the APEGM
Code of Ethics and the
Professional Engineering Act
of Manitoba, and the
primary role of the engineer
Professionalism to protect the public and the
public interest.
Manitoba Workplace Health
and Safety Act:
Awareness of the importance
of, and demonstration of,
the principles of personal
and workplace health and
safety.
Registration as a
Professional Engineer:
Understands the implications
of, and the process for,
becoming a Registered
Professional Engineer.
Rubrics informed by University of Delaware College of Engineering Civil & Environmental Engineering ABET Scoring Rubrics for Program Outcomes: Outcome 8: An understanding of Professional and ethical responsibility. Retrieved on October 9, 2013
from http://www.ce.udel.edu/ABET/Current%20Documentation/ABET_scoring_rubrics_index.html. Informed by Rubrics for Outcome Assessment. Retrieved on October 9, 2013 from:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4Gwd7haic2wJ:www.bae.uky.edu/academics/abet/Rubrics%2520Draft%2520July%25202012.docx+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=safari
Level 4
Strong
Demonstrates exemplary behavior
and assumes responsibility for
own actions. Models collegiality
among peers and faculty.
Attendance is regular.
Demonstrates exemplary
awareness, understanding and
promotion of the APEGM Code of
Ethics and the Professional
Engineering Act of Manitoba. Able
to evaluate and judge applicable
circumstances using these codes.
Demonstrates exemplary personal
and workplace health and safety
behaviour, and promotes
workplace health and safety
behaviour in others.
Demonstrates thorough
comprehension of the
implications of, and promotes the
process for, becoming a P.Eng.May
demonstrate commitment by
being a student member of
APEGM.
Page 11 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Demonstrates appropriate
behavior and recognizes the
need to assume responsibility
for own actions. Is collegial
among peers and faculty.
Attendance is regular.
Demonstrates awareness and
understanding of the APEGM
Code of Ethics and the
Professional Engineering Act of
Manitoba. Able to interpret
applicable circumstances
using these codes.
Demonstrates awareness of
the importance of personal
and workplace health and
safety principles, and/or
demonstrates personal and
workplace health and safety
behaviour.
Demonstrates comprehension
of the implications of, and the
process for, becoming a P.Eng.
Level 2
Developing
Demonstrates some appropriate
behavior and some recognition
of the need to assume
responsibility for own actions.
Demonstrates some collegiality
among peers and faculty. Often
in attendance.
Demonstrates some awareness
and understanding of the APEGM
Code of Ethics and the
Professional Engineering Act of
Manitoba.
Demonstrates some awareness
of the importance of personal
and workplace health and
safety. Does not often
demonstrate personal and
workplace health and safety
behaviour.
Demonstrates some
comprehension of the
implications of, and the process
for, becoming a P.Eng.
Level 1
Needs Work
Demonstrates inappropriate
behavior and minimal or no
responsibility for own actions.
Rarely collegial among peers and
faculty. Noticeably absent.
Demonstrates minimal or no
awareness of the APEGM Code of
Ethics and the Professional
Engineering Act of Manitoba.
Demonstrates minimal or no
awareness of the importance of
personal and workplace health
and safety. Ignores personal and
workplace health and safety
principles.
Demonstrates minimal or no
comprehension of the implications
of, or the process for, becoming a
P.Eng.
 9. Impact of Engineering on Society and the Environment: An ability to consider and analyze social and environmental aspects of
engineering activities. Such ability includes an understanding of the interactions that engineering has with the economic, social, health, safety,
legal, and cultural aspects of sustainable design and development and environmental stewardship.
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1
INDICATORS
Focus Areas
Strong Competent Developing Needs Work
Considers Diverse Considers, explains and Considers and explains Some consideration of diverse Minimal consideration of
Perspectives: evaluates multiple diverse multiple diverse perspectives perspectives when diverse perspectives when
Ability to consider other perspectives when when investigating investigating engineering investigating engineering
cultural, disciplinary, and investigating engineering engineering impact on society impact on society and impact on society and
ethical perspectives when impact on society and and environment. environment. environment.
investigating engineering environment.
impact on society and
environment.
Considers Impact: Considers, explains and Considers and explains the Some consideration of the Minimal or no consideration of
Impact of Engineering on Ability to consider the evaluates the impact of impact of engineering impact of engineering the impact of engineering
Society and the impact of engineering engineering interventions on interventions on society and interventions on society and interventions on society and
Environment interventions (decisions and society and environment. environment. environment. environment.
technology) on society and
environment (historical
and/or contemporary).
Solutions for Societal and Identifies, explains and Identifies and explains Identifies some solutions to Minimal or no ability to
Environmental Challenges: evaluates multiple solutions to multiple solutions to challenges in society and the identifying solutions to
Ability to identify solutions challenges in society and the challenges in society and the environment. challenges in society and the
to challenges in society and environment. environment. environment.
the environment.

Personal and Collective Recognizes the responsibility Recognizes the responsibility Some recognition of the Minimal or no recognition of
Responsibility: of engineers and evaluates the of engineers and identifies the responsibility of engineers and the responsibility of engineers
Ability to recognize the consequences of engineering consequences of engineering the consequences of and the consequences of
individual and collective interventions on society and interventions on society and engineering interventions on engineering interventions on
responsibility of engineering environment. environment. society and environment. society and environment.
and its interventions on
society and the
environment.
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; and by Dr. Jan Oleszkiewicz, Faculty of
Engineering, University of Manitoba, 2014.

Page 12 of 16
 10. Ethics and Equity: An ability to apply professional ethics, accountability, and equity.

Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

Focus Areas INDICATORS
Strong Competent Developing Needs Work
Ethical Issue Recognition Approaches all situations with Able to approach situations Some ability to approach Minimal or no ability to approach
and Behaviour: awareness and consideration of with consideration of ethical situations with consideration of situations with consideration of
Ability to recognize and act the ethical issues involved, and issues, and acts to resolve ethical issues, and/or some ethical issues.
on ethical issues (personal, actively works to resolve them. them. ability to act to resolve them.
professional and corporate).
Equity: Approaches all situations with Able to approach situations Some ability to approach Minimal or no ability to approach
Ability to recognize consideration of equitable issues with consideration of situations with consideration of situations with consideration of
equitable issues (ethnicity, involved, and actively behaves equitable issues, and acts with equitable issues, and behaves equitable issues.
gender, age, sexual with inclusivity. inclusivity. with some regard for inclusivity.
orientation, faith,
geography, socio-economic
status, etc.), and
acts/behaves with
Ethics and Equity inclusivity.
Accountability: Always assumes responsibility for Assumes responsibility for own Recognizes the need to assume Minimal or no ability to recognize
Recognizes the need to own actions. actions. responsiblity for own actions, the need to assume responsibility
assume responsibility for but may not always act on this for own actions. May blame others
own actions. recognition. for own issues and problems.

Proper Use of Others Always recognizes and applies Recognizes and applies proper Some recognition and Minimal or no recognition and/or
Work: proper ethical use of intellectual ethical use of intellectual application of proper ethical application of proper ethical use
Ability to recognize, property, copyrighted materials, property, copyrighted use of intellectual property, of intellectual property,
understand and apply proper and others research. materials, and others copyrighted materials, and copyrighted materials, or others
ethical use of intellectual research. others research. research.
property, copyrighted
materials, and research.
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; and University of Delaware College of
Engineering Civil & Environmental Engineering ABET Scoring Rubrics for Program Outcomes: Outcome 8: An understanding of Professional and ethical responsibility. Retrieved on October 9, 2013 from:
http://www.ce.udel.edu/ABET/Current%20Documentation/ABET_scoring_rubrics_index.html

Page 13 of 16
 11. Economics and Project Management: An ability to appropriately incorporate economics and business practices including project, risk and change
management into the practice of engineering and to understand their limitations.
Focus areas INDICATORS
Project Management Proposal:
(see Individual & Ability to understand the problem,
Teamwork Rubric for the clients needs, and propose a
plan.
Team Management)
Budget:
Ability to create and/or adhere to
a budget.
Risk Analysis:
Ability to identify risks (physical,
emotional, monetary, risks of
repute, etc.) related to a project,
consider the likelihood of the risks,
and the gravity of their effects.
Economics
Time and Change Management:
Ability to estimate time on task,
establish deadlines/milestones,
follow timeline, monitor and
complete project. Ability to plan
for contingencies and adapt to
change.
Quality Assurance:
Ability to understand and assure
that work meets
expectations/specifications/
standards (project,
client/professor, industry, etc.).
Economics Principles:
Ability to comprehend and employ
economic principles of an
engineering project, including
short-term cost vs. long-term
value.
Evaluation of Project Outcomes:
Ability to evaluate the project and
adapt for subsequent projects.
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; the University of Delaware College of Engineering Civil & Environmental Engineering
ABET Scoring Rubrics for Program Outcomes: Outcome 7: A knowledge of professional practice issues such as procurement of work, bidding versus quality-based selection processes, and the interactions of design and construction professionals in executing a project. Retrieved on October 9, 2013
from http://www.ce.udel.edu/ABET/Current%20Documentation/ABET_scoring_rubrics_index.html; SLLO Project: Student Leader Learning Outcomes: Division of Student Affairs. Risk Management Rubric. Texas A & M University. Rubrics from SLLO Project. Copyright 2013 Department of
Student Life Studies, Texas A&M University. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Drupal Content Management Hosted by the Department of IT, Division of Student Affairs. Retrieved on October 15, 2013 from: http://sllo.tamu.edu/rubrics.
Level 4
Strong
Demonstrates an ability to create
a comprehensive proposal that
skillfully addresses the problem
and the clients needs.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
create and/or adhere to a
budget. Budget covers all
applicable areas, with room for
contingencies.
Identifies all risks related to the
project. Accurately estimates the
likelihood of the risks, and the
gravity of their effects.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
manage time and change.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
understand quality assurance.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
comprehend and employ
economic principles, including
cost versus value.
Demonstrates a skillful ability to
evaluate project outcomes and
adapt for subsequent projects.
Page 14 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Demonstrates an ability to create
a proposal that addresses the
problem and the clients needs.
Demonstrates an ability to create
and/or adhere to a budget.
Budget covers all applicable
areas of project.
Identifies risks related to the
project. Estimates the likelihood
of the risks, and the gravity of
their effects.
Demonstrates an ability to
manage time and change.
Demonstrates an ability to
understand quality assurance.
Demonstrates an ability to
comprehend and employ
economic principles, including
cost versus value.
Demonstrates an ability to
evaluate project outcomes and
adapt for subsequent projects.
Level 2
Developing
Demonstrates some ability to
create a proposal, which may not
fully address the problem and/or
the clients needs.
Demonstrates some ability to
create and/or adhere to a
budget. Budget covers most
applicable areas.
Identifies some basic risks, and is
able to estimate some of the
likelihood of the risks, and the
gravity of their effects.
Demonstrates some ability to
manage time and change.
Demonstrates some ability to
understand quality assurance.
Demonstrates some ability to
comprehend and employ
economic principles, including
cost versus value.
Demonstrates some ability to
evaluate project outcomes and
adapt for subsequent projects.
Level 1
Needs Work
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to create a proposal.
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to create or adhere to a
budget.
Identifies few basic risks. May
inaccurately estimate the
likelihood of the risks, and/or
the gravity of their effects.
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to manage time and
change.
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to understand quality
assurance.
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to comprehend and/or
employ economic principles,
including cost versus value.
Demonstrates minimal or no
ability to evaluate project
outcomes or adapt for subsequent
projects.
 12. Lifelong Learning (Ability to Learn): An ability to identify and to address their own educational needs in a changing world in ways sufficient to maintain
their competence and to allow them to contribute to the advancement of knowledge.
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Strong Competent Developing Needs Work
Interest and Curiosity: Demonstrates a skillful ability to Demonstrates an ability to explore a Demonstrates some ability to Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
Inclination/ability to explore a explore a subject/topic thoroughly, subject/topic, generating a variety explore a subject/topic, providing explore a subject/topic,
subject/topic in the pursuit of generating a variety of knowledge, of knowledge, demonstrating some knowledge, demonstrating demonstrating minimal interest or
knowledge. possibly specialized or obscure, fascination and curiosity. mild interest and growing curiosity. curiosity.
demonstrating deep fascination and
curiosity.

Initiative: Creates and seeks additional Finds and pursues additional Some inclination to explore Minimal or no inclination to identify
Inclination/ability to explore opportunities for learning. opportunities for learning. additional opportunities for additional opportunities for learning.
additional opportunities for learning.
learning.

Adaptabliity to New Situations: Demonstrates a skillful ability to apply Demonstrates an ability to apply Demonstrates some ability to apply Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
Ability to apply prior knowledge, prior knowledge, skills and/or prior knowledge, skills and/or prior knowledge, skills and/or apply prior knowledge, skills and/or
skills and/or behaviours to new behaviours in an innovative way to new behaviours to new situations. behaviours to new situations. behaviours to new situations.
situations. situations.

Staying Current: Demonstrates an active and thorough Demonstrates engagement in Demonstrates some engagement in Demonstrates minimal or no awareness
Engaged in staying current in the engagement, and promotes staying staying current in the chosen field. staying current in the chosen field. or appreciation for staying current in
chosen field. current and immersed in the chosen the chosen field.
Lifelong Learning field.

Asking Questions: Demonstrates a skillful ability to Demonstrates an ability to Demonstrates some ability to Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
Ability to recognize and/or recognize and construct meaningful recognize and construct meaningful recognize and/or construct recognize or construct meaningful or
construct meaningful and pertinent and pertinent questions. and/or pertinent questions. meaningful or pertinent questions. pertinent questions. May not be
questions. inclined to ask questions.

Handling Constructive Criticism: Demonstrates a skillful ability to seek, Demonstrates an ability to accept Demonstrates some ability to accept Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
Ability to accept and use accept and use constructive feedback. and use constructive feedback. and/or use constructive feedback. accept and use constructive feedback.
constructive feedback (desists from
quarreling; considers others' points
of view; shows appreciation for
feedback; implements change).
Reflection (Lessons Learned): Reflect with depth and insight on Demonstrates an ability to reflect Demonstrates some ability to reflect Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
Ability to reflect on (analyze and experiences/situations. Skillfully on experiences/situations. on experiences/situations. reflect on experiences/situations.
evaluate) experiences/situations, applies what is learned from Demonstrates learning through Demonstrates some learning through Tends to repeat mistakes.
and apply results from reflections to reflections to subsequent reflection. reflection.
subsequent experiences/situations. experiences/situations.
(Learns from successes and
mistakes, and recognizes
limitations.)
Rubrics informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; Alberta Education Online Guide to
Implementation. Retrieved from: http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/ssmt/html/docs/askingpowerfulquestions.pdf. For Constructive Criticism, adapted from: Rubric For The Role Play Of Accepting Criticism. Retrieved from:
http://www.cccoe.net/social/constructcritrubric.htm

Page 15 of 16
 12. Lifelong Learning: An ability to identify and to address their own educational needs in a changing world in ways sufficient to maintain their competence and to
allow them to contribute to the advancement of knowledge.
Focus Areas INDICATORS
Formulate a Topic /Define
Research Scope:
Ability to frame a topic,
determine research scope,
identify essential concepts and
define research questions.
Execute a Search Strategy and
Retrieve Needed Information:
Ability to use search strategies
and access information.
Select and Evaluate
Information and Sources
Critically:
Ability to use criteria to select
and evaluate sources and
information.
Research/
Information Literacy
Use Information to Realize an
Objective:
Ability to use information from a
variety of sources to achieve an
intended purpose.
Legal and Ethical Use of
Information:
Ability to appropriately employ
strategies to demonstrate an
ability to recognize, understand
and apply proper ethical and
legal use of intellectual
property, copyrighted materials
and research (i.e., proper use of
references and citations, and
restating, quoting and
summarizing; allegiance to
original context; differentiation
between public and original
knowledge).
Rubric informed by: Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and Universities; and by Norma Godavari, Faculty of
Engineering, University of Manitoba, 2014.
Level 4
Strong
Demonstrates the ability to succinctly
articulate a topic. Clearly and
concisely determines the research
scope, identifies essential concepts
and outlines research questions.
Demonstrates the ability to use
efficient and effectively-designed
search strategies to retrieve the most
relevant and appropriate information
sources. Effectively and recurrently
refines search.
Selects a variety of sources which
thoroughly covers the range of
research and directly relates to
concepts or answers research
questions. Able to skillfully analyze
information sources based on
reliablity, validity, accuracy, authority,
purpose, currency, relevance,
partiality and audience. Sources are
balanced and mostly authoritative.
Condenses, organizes and integrates
information from a variety of sources
to effectively and fully, realize a
specific purpose. Relates the relevancy
of each source to the topic.
Properly and legally cites all
information sources. Gets permission
to use information sources.
Demonstrate complete comprehension
of the legal and ethical boundaries
when using intellectual property,
copyrighted materials and research.
Page 16 of 16
Level 3
Competent
Demonstrates the ability to
articulate a topic. Determines the
research scope, identifies key
concepts and drafts research
questions.
Demonstrates the ability to use an
assortment of search strategies to
retrieve relevant and appropriate
information sources. Refines
search as needed.
Selects variety of sources which
covers the range of research and
relates to concepts or answers
research questions. Demonstrates
ability to distinguish between
relevant and irrelevant
information. Usually selects
sources using multiple criteria,
such as reliablity, validity,
accuracy, authority, purpose,
currency, and relevance. Sources
not always balanced.
Condenses, organizes and
integrates information from most
sources to support purpose.
Relates the relevancy of most
sources to the topic.
Properly and legally cites most
information sources. For
appropriate cases gets permission
to use information sources.
Demonstrates comprehension of
the legal and ethical boundaries
when using intellectual property,
copyrighted materials and
research.
Level 2
Developing
Demonstrates some ability to
articulate a topic, but the research
scope is either too expansive or too
limited. Can identify some key
concepts and draft some research
questions. Work needs refining.
Demonstrates the ability to use
search strategies to retrieve some
information sources, but strategies
are mainly simplistic and limited,
and search scope too broad for task
at hand. (Does not use controlled
vocabularies.) Information is found
within a narrow range of sources.
Selects some relevant sources, but
includes irrelevant sources. Chosen
information is somewhat connected
to research concepts or questions.
Rarely evaluates information for
reliablity, validity, accuracy,
authority, purpose, currency or
relevance. Many sources are not
authoritative, neither is there a
variety or balance of sources.
Able to summarize several sources,
but has difficulty integrating/making
the connections necessary to
support the purpose, (i.e., the
information needs to be
synthesized).
Some evidence of properly and
legally citing information sources.
Does not always get permission to
use information sources.
Demonstrates some comprehension
of the legal and ethical boundaries
when using intellectual property,
copyrighted materials and research.
Level 1
Needs Work
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
articulate a topic. Difficulty
determining the research scope,
identifying key concepts and/or
drafting research questions.
Demonstrates minimal or no ability to
formulate simple searches effectively.
Performs very basic keyword searches
(single words and/or simple phrases),
which retrieve unacceptably large
numbers of hits. Information is
selected randomly, with little or no
applicability or value.
Selects few sources with little breadth,
i.e., many sources are from the same
journal or web site, or from non-
referred articles and/or very general
web sites. Chosen information is not
connected to research concepts or
questions. Selects sources using limited
criteria, such as reliability, validity,
accuracy, authority, purpose, currency
or relevance.
Has difficulty condensing and
integrating information from many
sources, so does not accomplish the
proposed purpose.
The information is disjointed and/or
used incorrectly/ineffectively, i.e.,
misrepresented. Direct quotes from
sources may be overused.
Has quoted directly from sources
without properly and legally citing
information sources (plagiarism); or
does not know about getting permission
to use information sources. Does not
understand the legal and ethical
boundaries when using intellectual
property, copyrighted materials and
research.