Community Science Project — Assessment Rubric
Aromātai — Understanding What Quality Scientific Work Looks Like
Ngā Whāinga Akoranga · Learning Intentions
- Understand what quality scientific work looks like across five criteria
- Use a rubric to self-assess honestly before a teacher assessment
- Reflect on what worked and what I would do differently
Paearu Angitu · Success Criteria
- I can self-assess my work against each criterion with honesty and specific evidence
- I can identify at least one area of strength and one area for improvement
- I can explain how my investigation connects to a real community need
Hononga Marautanga · Curriculum Alignment
Investigating in science: Students develop questions, plan systematic investigations, gather data, and use evidence to explain their findings. They understand that science is a way of explaining the world.
Resources and the environment: Students understand how communities make decisions about sustainability and investigate how local environments are managed and protected. Connections to community benefit and civic action.
Mō Tēnei Rārangi Aromātai · About This Rubric
This rubric has five criteria. For each one, there are four performance levels. Use the Self column to rate your own work honestly first, then your teacher will add their rating in the Teacher column.
Performance levels: 1 = Beginning | 2 = Developing | 3 = Meeting | 4 = Exceeding
Te Rārangi Aromātai · The Rubric
| Criterion | 1 — Beginning | 2 — Developing | 3 — Meeting | 4 — Exceeding | Self | Teacher |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Question & Hypothesis Did the student frame a clear, testable question? |
No clear question. Hypothesis is missing or cannot be tested. | Question is present but vague. Hypothesis is stated but hard to test. | Clear question that can be investigated. Hypothesis predicts an outcome with a reason. | Precise, original question connected to community need. Hypothesis is well-reasoned and testable. | ___ | ___ |
| 2. Method Was the method systematic and replicable? |
No clear method. Steps are missing or could not be repeated. | Method is partially described. Some steps are missing or unclear. | Method is described clearly enough that someone else could repeat it. Variables are identified. | Method is thorough and rigorous. Fair testing considered. Would be easy to replicate precisely. | ___ | ___ |
| 3. Data Collection Is data recorded accurately and completely? |
Little or no data recorded. Records are illegible or incomplete. | Some data collected but gaps exist. Records are partially organised. | Data is recorded accurately and organised clearly (e.g. table or chart). Enough data to draw conclusions. | Comprehensive, well-organised data set. Any anomalies noted and addressed. Appropriate units and labels throughout. | ___ | ___ |
| 4. Analysis & Conclusion Does the student interpret results and connect back to the original question? |
No analysis. Conclusion is absent or simply restates data without interpretation. | Some interpretation attempted. Limited connection between results and the original question. | Results are interpreted using evidence. Conclusion clearly connects findings to the original question. | Insightful analysis identifies patterns, exceptions, and limitations. Conclusion is nuanced and connects to broader implications. | ___ | ___ |
| 5. Connection to Community Does the investigation connect to a real local need? |
No connection to community. Investigation is purely academic with no real-world relevance identified. | A community connection is mentioned but not developed or justified. | A genuine local need is identified and the investigation connects clearly to it. Findings are relevant to people outside the classroom. | Investigation is grounded in real community partnership. Findings are shared with stakeholders. Actionable recommendations made. | ___ | ___ |
Self total: _____ / 20 Teacher total: _____ / 20
Whakaaro Hōhonu · Reflection
He aha āku mahi pai? · What did I do well?
He aha tāku e huri ai? · What would I do differently?
He aha āku pātai hou? · What new questions do I have?
Aronga Mātauranga Māori
Mātauranga Māori is, in many ways, community science. Knowledge about tides, planting seasons, bird migration, soil types, and medicinal plants was developed and tested through generations of community observation — not in individual experiments, but through collective practice and careful transmission. A kaumātua's knowledge about when to plant kūmara was not a personal opinion: it was the distilled result of hundreds of years of systematic observation by many people.
This changes what "rigorous science" looks like. Rigor does not require a laboratory or a single experimenter. It requires careful, systematic observation; accurate recording; honest acknowledgement of error; and transmission to others who can test and refine the knowledge. How does your investigation meet those standards? In what ways could community science improve what you did?
Ngā Rauemi Tautoko · Support Materials
Resources already provided:
- Community science project brief (Unit 3 task sheet)
- Data recording table templates
- Sentence starters for analysis and conclusion writing
- Peer review protocol card
Aronga Rerekē · Differentiated Pathways
Tīmata · Entry Level
Use the rubric to identify one criterion where you feel confident and one where you need support. Share this with your teacher before submitting your project.
Paerewa · On Level
Complete the full self-assessment. Write at least one piece of evidence from your project for each rating you give yourself.
Tūāpae · Extension
After your teacher assessment, compare your self-rating to their rating. For any criterion where you differ by 2 or more, write a paragraph exploring why — what did you see in your work that they didn't, or vice versa?
Curriculum alignment
- Nature of Science — Knowledge: Science is a way of investigating, understanding, and explaining our natural, physical world; mātauranga Māori offers complementary systems of knowledge that enrich scientific understanding.
- Identity, Culture, and Organisation: Understand how different knowledge systems — including mātauranga Māori — shape how communities relate to the natural world.