evaluation

CATEGORY	4 = Exceeds the Standard	3 = Meets the Standard	2 = Partially Meets the Standard	1 = Does not Meet the Standard	Score
Background	The timeline provides detailed background leading up to the court case.	The timeline provides adequate background leading up to the court case.	The timeline provides some background leading up to the court case but is missing one or two important details.	The timeline provides little or no background leading up to the court case
Judicial Events	Timeline covers all judicial events related to the Amistad case. Facts were accurate for all events reported on the timeline.	Timeline contains at least 7-8 judicial events related to the Amistad case. Facts were accurate for almost all events reported on the timeline.	Timeline contains at least 5-6 judicial events related to the Amistad case Facts were accurate for most of the events reported on the timeline.	Timeline contains fewer than 5 judicial events. Facts were often inaccurate for events reported on the timeline.
Dates	An accurate, complete date has been included for each event.	An accurate, complete date has been included for almost every event.	An accurate date has been included for almost every event.	Dates are inaccurate and/or missing for several events.
Graphics	All graphics are relevant and balanced with text use.	All graphics are relevant, but there appear to be too few or too many.	Some graphics are relevant and their use is balanced with text use.	Several graphics are not relevant.
Sources	Source information collected and cited for all graphics, facts and quotes.	Source information collected for all graphics, facts and quotes. Most cited.	Source information collected for graphics, facts and quotes, but not cited.	Very little or no source information was collected.
Opinion	Each team members made thoughtful defense of their opinion re: human rights vs. property rights.	Most team members made thoughtful defense of their opinion re: human rights vs. property rights.	At least 2 team member made thoughtful defense of their opinion re: human rights vs. property rights.	Only one or no team member made thoughtful defense of their opinion re: human rights vs. property rights.
Final Score

CATEGORY	Excellent = 4	Good = 3	Satisfactory = 2	Needs Improvement = 1	Score
Accuracy of Content	All information cards made for the game are correct.	All but one of the information cards made for the game are correct.	All but two of the information cards made for the game are correct.	Several information cards made for the game are not accurate.
Knowledge Gained	All students in group could easily and correctly state several facts about the topic used for the game without looking at the game.	All students in the group could easily and correctly state 1-2 facts about the topic used for the game without looking at the game.	Most students in the group could easily and correctly state 1-2 facts about the topic used for the game without looking at the game.	Several students in the group could NOT correctly state facts about the topic used for the game without looking at the game.
Creativity	The group put a lot of thought into making the game interesting and fun to play as shown by creative questions, game pieces and/or game board.	The group put some thought into making the game interesting and fun to play by using textures, fancy writing, and/or interesting characters.	The group tried to make the game interesting and fun, but some of the things made it harder to understand/enjoy the game.	Little thought was put into making the game interesting or fun.
Rules	Rules were written clearly enough that all could easily participate.	Rules were written, but one part of the game needed slightly more explanation.	Rules were written, but people had some difficulty figuring out the game.	The rules were not written.
Cooperative work	The group worked well together with all members contributing significant amounts of quality work.	The group generally worked well together with all members contributing some quality work.	The group worked fairly well together with all members contributing some work.	The group often did not work well together and the game appeared to be the work of only 1-2 students in the group.
Totals					/20

Evaluation Timeline: AMISTAD Case