Applications of Linear Inequalities Modeling Task Rubric
Level of Proficiency
Level
Criteria 1
Communication
Key Question: Was I able to
understand the student’s thinking
or did I have to make inferences
about what they were trying to do?
Criteria 2
Notation and Terminology
Key Question: Was I able to follow
the student’s work due to a
consistent and accurate use of
notation and terminology?
Criteria 3
Mathematical Process
(Including Technology)
Key Question: Was I able to
understand how the student
developed and justified a model?
Criteria 4
Mathematical Analysis
Key Question: Was I able to detect
the student’s reflection on the
feasibility and validity of the model
within context?
Criteria 5
Results and Accuracy
Key Question: Was I able to
ascertain that the student generated
correct results in the task to an
appropriate degree of accuracy?
4 3
Exemplary
The student’s explanations were
coherent, concise, and in-depth,
demonstrating strong reasoning.
The student uses clear and
appropriate forms of
mathematical representation.
The student consistently uses
appropriate notation and
terminology throughout their
work.
The student formally defines
variables
writes constraints correctly as
inequalities
The student clearly shows a
feasible region for the constraints,
which is completely correct
The student uses mathematics
completely and correctly to
reflect upon whether the region
makes sense for the constraints.
The student correctly reflects
upon whether their solution gives
the optimal value
The student finds the Optimal
solution to the problem
The student generates correct
results throughout the task.
Proficient
The student’s explanations
were usually clear, and often
demonstrated good reasoning.
The student uses adequate
forms of mathematical
representation.
The student uses mostly
appropriate notation and
terminology with a couple of
minor exceptions.
The student informally
defines variables
writes some constraints
correctly as inequalities
The student clearly shows a
feasible region which is
mainly correct for the
constraints
The student uses mathematics
completely to reflect upon
whether the region makes
sense for the constraints and
makes few errors.
The student reflects upon
whether their solution gives
the optimal with few errors
The student finds the Optimal
solution to the problem
The student generates results
that are mainly correct.
2 1
Developing
The student’s explanations were
hard to follow or redundant in
some places.
The student attempts to use
some appropriate forms of
mathematical representation.
The student uses some
appropriate notation and
terminology, but there are
several errors.
The student implicitly defines
variables
attempts to write constraints as
inequalities
The student shows a feasible
region which is partially correct
for the constraints
.
The student uses mathematics to
reflect upon whether the region
makes sense for some of the
constraints and makes some
errors.
The student attempts to reflect
upon whether their solution
gives the optimal with some
errors
The student finds the a solution
to the problem, but it is not the
optimal solution
The student generates a few
correct results or the same error
is consistently applied to several
results.
0
Emerging Insufficient
Evidence
The student gave little or no
focused explanation, leaving
too much inference to the
reader.
The student did not use
appropriate forms of
mathematical representation.
The student uses little or no
appropriate notation and
terminology.
The student does not define
any variables
But attempts to write
constraints as inequalities
The student attempts to show
a feasible region but is
incorrect
The student attempts to use
mathematics to reflect upon
whether the region makes
sense for the constraints but
work is redundant or
unclear.
The student attempts to
reflect upon their solution but
it is unclear.
The student does not find a
solution to the problem
OR
The results generated are
completely incorrect.