Rubrics.docx
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Rubrics.docx as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 636
- Pages: 2
ST. PAUL COLLEGE OF MAKATI D.M. Rivera St., Poblacion, Makati City Narrative of the Authentic Task: You are a member of the Paulinian Scribes and you were assigned by your Editor-in-Chief to write a play critique on “The Phantom of the Opera” performed at the Royal Albert Hall in 2011. This will be part of the Arts and Culture page of your school paper’s upcoming issue. You are expected by your EIC to write with proper structure, to scrutinize the summary, performance, and technical elements, and to have your own reaction to the play. CRITERIA
Structure and Introduction 15%
EXCEEDING 8-10 points Your writing is structured, clear, and paragraphs are linked with strong transitions. Opening paragraph is concise and contains all necessary information. Biographies of the playwright and director are included. History of the theatre. No mechanical errors. Paragraph includes a brief overview of the beginning, middle, and end of the show. Reader does not 'give it away' & has no difficulty knowing what the basics of the play are. The history of the play is also given.
MEETING 6-7 points
APPROACHING 4-5 points
BEGINNING 0-3 points
You have clear opening, body and conclusion paragraphs. Paragraphs are structured correctly. You have almost all elements necessary in the opening paragraph. There are one to three mechanical errors.
Clear, though structure is weak. Work on sentence structure and/or paragraphing.
Disorganized. Topics are related with little sense of structure.
You have one or two elements necessary in the opening paragraph. You have four to six mechanical errors.
You have not followed the format for the opening paragraph. There are numerous mechanical errors
Paragraph included a brief overview of the elements of the story. Reader can grasp most of what the story is.
Plot summary only highlighted one part of the story (beginning, middle, or end). Reader has a hard time figuring out what the story is.
Plot summary was missing, incoherent, or wrong. Reader cannot ascertain what the story is about from the review.
The critique of the acting & directing is precise. Writer gives The critique is specific, including Performance evidence to support their many details and analysis. The 25% statements. It includes insightful writer supports each statement. detail and drama vocabulary.
The review includes some reference to the acting & directing. It makes observations without supporting their statements with examples.
There is no evaluation of the actor’s performances & directing or evaluation is incomplete and unspecific.
Plot Summary 15%
TOTAL
Costume evaluation is descriptive and thoughtful. Writer describes several costumes and discusses how the costumes tie to character. Technical Elements 25%
Reaction 20%
Review addresses both lights and set in detail. Evaluates how they were used and their effectiveness. Writer describes how the set was made. Evidence of the 'Q & A' after the show is evident. Goes above and beyond discussing their opinion of the play and defended their stance. They have compared the play they saw to the original script.
Writer describes the main costumes and includes discussion of how it ties to character. Needs to include more depth. Review addresses lights and set. Could have used more detail. Evaluates how they were used and their effectiveness.
Discusses many opinions of the play and defends most of their stance.
Writer describes costumes but does not include how the costumes reveal character. Describes lights and sets but does not evaluate how they were used or their effectiveness.
Discusses some opinions of the play and defends some of their stance.
There is no evaluation of costume and no descriptions. Writer needs to tie the costumes back to the characters. Review is missing a description of one or both the lights and the set. There is no evaluation of how they were used or their effectiveness.
Discusses very few to no opinions of the play with no defense.
Structure and Introduction 15%
EXCEEDING 8-10 points Your writing is structured, clear, and paragraphs are linked with strong transitions. Opening paragraph is concise and contains all necessary information. Biographies of the playwright and director are included. History of the theatre. No mechanical errors. Paragraph includes a brief overview of the beginning, middle, and end of the show. Reader does not 'give it away' & has no difficulty knowing what the basics of the play are. The history of the play is also given.
MEETING 6-7 points
APPROACHING 4-5 points
BEGINNING 0-3 points
You have clear opening, body and conclusion paragraphs. Paragraphs are structured correctly. You have almost all elements necessary in the opening paragraph. There are one to three mechanical errors.
Clear, though structure is weak. Work on sentence structure and/or paragraphing.
Disorganized. Topics are related with little sense of structure.
You have one or two elements necessary in the opening paragraph. You have four to six mechanical errors.
You have not followed the format for the opening paragraph. There are numerous mechanical errors
Paragraph included a brief overview of the elements of the story. Reader can grasp most of what the story is.
Plot summary only highlighted one part of the story (beginning, middle, or end). Reader has a hard time figuring out what the story is.
Plot summary was missing, incoherent, or wrong. Reader cannot ascertain what the story is about from the review.
The critique of the acting & directing is precise. Writer gives The critique is specific, including Performance evidence to support their many details and analysis. The 25% statements. It includes insightful writer supports each statement. detail and drama vocabulary.
The review includes some reference to the acting & directing. It makes observations without supporting their statements with examples.
There is no evaluation of the actor’s performances & directing or evaluation is incomplete and unspecific.
Plot Summary 15%
TOTAL
Costume evaluation is descriptive and thoughtful. Writer describes several costumes and discusses how the costumes tie to character. Technical Elements 25%
Reaction 20%
Review addresses both lights and set in detail. Evaluates how they were used and their effectiveness. Writer describes how the set was made. Evidence of the 'Q & A' after the show is evident. Goes above and beyond discussing their opinion of the play and defended their stance. They have compared the play they saw to the original script.
Writer describes the main costumes and includes discussion of how it ties to character. Needs to include more depth. Review addresses lights and set. Could have used more detail. Evaluates how they were used and their effectiveness.
Discusses many opinions of the play and defends most of their stance.
Writer describes costumes but does not include how the costumes reveal character. Describes lights and sets but does not evaluate how they were used or their effectiveness.
Discusses some opinions of the play and defends some of their stance.
There is no evaluation of costume and no descriptions. Writer needs to tie the costumes back to the characters. Review is missing a description of one or both the lights and the set. There is no evaluation of how they were used or their effectiveness.
Discusses very few to no opinions of the play with no defense.
