Evaluation
Scale: 1 – No evidence available for assessment 2 – Does not meet minimum requirement 3 – Minimum requirement questionable 4 – Satisfies minimum requirement 5
– Exceeds minimum requirement
Presenters: _______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
Assessed by: _______________________________
Date: _______________________________
|
Criteria |
Evaluation |
Weight |
Points |
|
The system is safe to handle and operate. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
|
The system is capable of performing several tests without repair. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
The design was based on appropriate principles of wastewater treatment. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
New contaminants did not appear to be added to the water during treatment. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
Treatment reduced the turbidity of the water. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
Nitrate and/or ammonia-N concentrations were reduced. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
Phosphate concentrations were reduced. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
Biological oxygen demand was reduced. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
Reasonable explanations were provided of the treatment system and its results. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
The presenters provided clear answers to any questions that were raised. |
1 2 3 4 5 |
1 3 5 |
|
|
|
|
Total Points: |
|
In each row, multiply the Evaluation score by the Weight (assigned by the teacher) to get the Point score. Then sum the numbers in column 4 to get the Total Points.
Comments:
What was a particular strength of this wastewater treatment design?
What suggestions do you have for improving either this design or the way in which it was presented?