Attachment “VII”
Sustainable Public Health: Walkability & Obesity in the Bioregion
Curriculum created by Jean McFarland, Edmonds Community College
Rubric for Obesity Prevention Plan for Snohomish County
Not College Level Work / College Level WorkPoor / Needs Improvement / Good / Excellent / Score
Title / No information / Title with little information / Too much information / Presents a concise informative title / /2
Obesity Prevention Plan / Plan is not clear. / Plan is embedded in vague or rambling text. / Clear statement of plan by the end of the work. / Clear statement of plan in first paragraph or two. / /4
Public Health Issues / Public health issues are missing or misinterpreted. / Public health issues are mentioned. / Public health issues are included but plan does not explicitly address them. / Public health issues are explicitly addressed by the plan. / /4
Disease/Disorders / Links to diabetes and/or obesity are missing. / Some discussion of diabetes risk factors and complications and costs of obesity. / Diabetes and obesity are discussed but need to be better integrated into the plan. / The plan addresses diabetes risk factors and complications and costs of obesity. / /4
Data & Walk score / Data and/or is walk score is/are missing, inaccurate or misinterpreted. / Data and walk score are included but not referred to or not very useful in supporting the plan. / Data and walk score are referred to in the text and somewhat useful in supporting the plan. / Data and walk score are referred to in the text and used to justify the plan. / /3
Graph / Graph is inaccurate and/or is missing much important information or is missing. / Graph type is inappropriate for the type of data and/or lacking important elements and/or is not referred to in the text. / Graph is good, but lacking an important element [informative title, labeled axis (including units), accurately displayed data points, a key (if needed), appropriate scaling.] / Graph is referred to in the text, is neatly executed, accurate and contains all required elements. / /4
King Co. & Moses Lake plans / King Co. & Moses Lake plans are referred not to in the text or are misrepresented in the text. / King Co. & Moses Lake plans are referred to in the text with little effort to connect them to the proposed plan / King Co. & Moses Lake plans are referred to in the text with some discussion. / King Co. & Moses Lake plans are referred to in the text and the proposed plan uses or rejects elements from these plans. / /4
Conclusion / Does not present a logical explanation for plan & fails to address elements of the assignment. / Does not present a logical explanation for plan OR fails to address important elements of the assignment. / Presents a logical explanation for plan and addresses most elements of the assignment. / Presents a logical explanation for plan and addresses all elements of the assignment.
Grammar, Spelling & Mechanics / Frequent grammar and/or spelling errors; < 2 or >4 pages / More than two errors / Only one or two errors. / All grammar and spelling are correct.
Total / /25