Developing a rubric in three Steps

Start point- identifying common qualities

Breaking down detailed qualities_ how will they know it's a job well done

These qualities are then broken down into three standards. Starting at what they would need to do to work at the desired standard, and then stepping stones from not having that quality to doing it poorly and then onto quite well. This tool should help students plan their work, check it of their own accord, have conversations about quality and critique with a common language. 

Aspect	Below Standard	Working Towards Standard	Working at standard	Working above Standard
Back Story	No event has taken place Explanation of character not considered.	an event has occurred but it is unclear how this has led to the current situation The event taken place lacks the significance or importance needed. The event is difficult to believe. Back story is just linked to flaws and talents no bigger picture of character.	an event has occurred  that leads to the current situation. The event must be significant to the character eg tragic or unfortunate. The event provides motivation for the quest. The event must be rooted in reality and be relatable. Backstory reveals/ explains character eg flaws and talents
Appearance	Simple appearance only is described written in a combination of 1st and 3rd person the protagonist lacks uniqueness	mental character revealed but not linked to BS Physical appearance not related to mental character it is difficult to relate to the protagonist. They are too different to us. Written in 1st or 3rd person the protagonist has an uniqueness for either abilities or Vulnerability	Mental character is revealed and linked to BS Physical Character is revealed and may be linked to mental character. The protagonist is a human like or easily relatable emotional character revealed and is written in 1st or 3rd person omniscient mental, physical and Emotional appearance are interrelated the protagonist has an uniqueness for BOTH their abilities and Vulnerability
Name	Everyone is called space pants.	Names are cool but not necessarily consistent, or revealing	is Consistent with BS eg Nationality Some names will have other meanings Some names will represent “character values”
Numbers	Too few minor characters	Too many minor characters.	1 protagonist 1 antagonist 2-3 minor characters
Relationships	the relationship is too simple between the Pand A or is based on simple characteristics The relationship does not change the quest is independent of th relationship	The PA relationship is simple based on one feature The relationship is represented in only one way - emotional or physical or emotional The change in the relationship is not clear or is difficult to spot. the dependence of the quest upon the relationship is not clear Other character relationships are too complex may detract from plot These relationships dont add to the plot	the PA relationship is complex and intertwined There are multiple connections between them the connections are represnted in a commination of physical, mental and emotional ways The PA realtionship MUST change over time The PA realtionship must be dependent upon the QUEST Other relationships should be simpler Other relationships act as plot devices

What have you done to build a sense of community or team ethos?

Here's a selection of ideas from around project fortnight :

1.       Names with stickers on, reflection diary with a focus on shared responsibility and being a team player.

We have begun to build a team atmosphere by playing ‘get to know you’ games including: two truths one lie and name rhymes. Pupils have now been put into their groups and have presented their research to each other. We have discussed empathy and what we need to be as learners, teachers and friends.

Overall, a fabulous start J

They’re assigned into World Cup Teams and points are awarded for each activity. Good sportsmanship and organisation is also rewarded whilst poor behaviour/concentration can also see teams lose points.

A strong feature from our Group Agreement was the adoption of regular critique. We had our first round today, with some good feedback from the group. It was made very clear that the presenting group needed to take accurate notes during the process so that they then could use them as action points. The other important routine established was  drafting , with the acceptance that work completed today would be radically improved by June 27^th. Not earth shattering I know, but important nonetheless.

Stiudents giving critique P3 as to what makes a great team (look, feel, sound). Groups allowed to fail, review as to what went wrong and next steps forward. Result? Damian and Kieran self-regulating their behaviour by leaving their respective groups temporarily, designing and modelling an awesome clock, whilst still maintaining responsibility within their original group.

Students  mentioned in today's review that they like that it is a "real audience and product"


We just did a getting to know you game (find the lie) and came up with a class agreement, will be more SoP and feedback agreement on Wednesday after trip tomorrow.

To build up team we have a rewards board. We award stamps for team work, problem solving, new knowledge, developing a skill, and giving specific and helpful feedback. The team the with the most points everyday wins a prize. 

    The students have just ‘got on with it’

·         No fuss or issues – students very cooperative with each other

·         We’ve used Quality Audience, counting back from 5, played a team game on Monday morning