Assessment Rubric for Game Design Activity
|
Level 1 |
Level 2 |
Level 3 |
Level 4 |
|
|
Knowledge and Understanding |
||||
|
Knowlege of content
|
Demonstrates limited knowledge of game elements such as goals; core dynamics; game mechanics; components; rules; spaces
|
Demonstrates some knowledge of game elements such as goals; core dynamics; game mechanics; components; rules; spaces
|
Demonstrates considerable knowledge of game elements such as goals; core dynamics; game mechanics; components; rules; spaces
|
Demonstrates thorough knowledge of game elements such as goals; core dynamics; game mechanics; components; rules; spaces
|
|
Understanding of content
|
Demonstrates limited understanding of the relationships between the different game elements and how they affect the player experience
|
Demonstrates some understanding of the relationships between the different game elements and how they affect the player experience
|
Demonstrates considerable understanding of the relationships between the different game elements and how they affect the player experience
|
Demonstrates thorough understanding of the relationships between the different game elements and how they affect the player experience. For example, the student can explain how a specific game mechanic supports the game’s theme or creates opportunities for strategic decision-making.
|
|
Thinking |
||||
|
Use of planning skills
|
Demonstrates limited use of planning skills. The game may lack a clear purpose or direction. Playtesting feedback has little detail and/or is poorly communicated.
|
Demonstrates some use of planning skills. The game’s purpose and direction may be somewhat unclear or inconsistent. Playtesting feedback has some detail and is communicated with some clarity.
|
Demonstrates considerable use of planning skills. The game has a clear purpose and direction, and the design process is well-organized. Playtesting feedback is thorough and clearly communicated.
|
Demonstrates sophisticated use of planning skills. The planning process is highly organized and efficient, anticipating potential challenges and incorporating solutions. Playtesting feedback is thorough and insightful and clearly communicated.
|
| Use of processing skills
|
Struggles to apply insights from analysis to new designs or evaluate design choices.
|
Some ability to apply insights from analysis to new designs and evaluate design choices.
|
Considerable ability to apply insights from analysis to new designs and evaluate design choices.
|
High degree of ability to apply insights from analysis to new designs and evaluate design choices.
|
|
Use of critical/creative thinking processes
|
The game lacks originality and demonstrates minimal creativity.
|
The game shows some evidence of originality and creativity.
|
The game is original and creative.
|
The game is highly original and imaginative, showcasing innovative solutions to design challenges.
|
|
Communication |
||||
|
Expression and organization of ideas and information
|
The explanation of the game is unclear and disorganized. Game mechanics are confusing.
|
The explanation of the game is somewhat clear but may lack organization. Game mechanics are partially effective.
|
The explanation of the game is clear, logical, and well-organized. Game mechanics are effective.
|
The explanation of the game is articulate, engaging, and evocative. Game mechanics are highly effective.
|
| Communication for different audiences and purposes |
Communicates for different audiences and purposes with limited effectiveness when presenting theirgame design and feedback.
|
Communicates for different audiences and purposes with some effectiveness when presenting their game design and feedback.
|
Communicates for different audiences and purposes with considerable effectiveness when presenting their game design and feedback.
|
Communicates for different audiences and purposes with a high degree of effectiveness when presenting their game design and feedback.
|
|
Use of conventions
|
The game design makes limited use of the conventions of game design and/or is expressed unclearly.
|
The game design makes some use of the conventions of game design and is expressed somewhat clearly.
|
The game design makes effective use of the conventions of game design and/or is expressed clearly.
|
The game design makes highly effective use of the conventions of game design and/or is expressed entirely clearly.
|
|
Application |
||||
|
Application of knowledge and skills in familiar contexts
|
The game is not functional or engaging, and playtesting feedback is shallow or irrelevant.
|
The game is partially functional and engaging, and some playtesting feedback is detailed and relevant.
|
The game is functional and engaging, and playtesting feedback is detailed and relevant.
|
The game is well-designed, highly engaging, and demonstrates a deep understanding of game design principles. Feedback is highly detailed and insightful.
|
| Transfer of knowledge and skills
|
Transfers their understanding of game design to the game concept with limited effectiveness
|
Transfers their understanding of game design to the game concept with some effectiveness
|
Transfers their understanding of game design to the game concept with considerable effectiveness
|
Transfers their understanding of game design to the game concept with a high degree ofeffectiveness
|
|
Making connections within and between various contexts
|
There is little connection between the different aspects of the game (core dynamic, game mechanies, rules, etc.) |
There is some connection between the different aspects of the game (core dynamic, game mechanies, rules, etc.) | There is considerable connection between the different aspects of the game (core dynamic, game mechanies, rules, etc.) | There is a high degree of connection between the different aspects of the game (core dynamic, game mechanies, rules, etc.) |