Day 2 Assessment Rubric¶

Advanced Scratch Programming¶

Component	Not Yet (1)	Developing (2)	Proficient (3)	Advanced (4)
Cloning	Does not use cloning	Uses cloning with significant help	Uses cloning correctly (create, start as clone, delete)	Uses cloning creatively (multiple clones, clone interactions)
Broadcasting	Does not use broadcasting	Uses one broadcast with help	Uses broadcasting to coordinate sprites	Uses multiple broadcasts effectively for complex coordination
Advanced lists	Uses lists only for basic storage	Uses lists with some operations	Uses lists for data management (add, delete, check)	Uses lists creatively (sorting, searching, complex data)
Complex logic	Simple conditions only	Combines 2–3 conditions	Nests conditions and combines with variables	Designs complex game logic with multiple conditions

Evidence: Scratch projects, code review, facilitator observation.

Aspect	Not Yet (1)	Developing (2)	Proficient (3)	Advanced (4)
Functionality	Project does not run or has major errors	Project runs but incomplete or buggy	Project works as intended	Project exceeds requirements with extras
Complexity	Very simple project (few sprites/blocks)	Moderate complexity (multiple sprites, some logic)	Complex project (multiple features, scoring, levels)	Highly complex (advanced features, polished)
Code organization	Code is messy or hard to follow	Some organization	Well-organized scripts, clear structure	Excellent organization, comments, reusable blocks
Debugging	Cannot identify or fix errors	Fixes obvious errors with help	Debugs independently	Helps others debug and explains strategies

Evidence: Completed Scratch project, code quality, project demo.

Component	Not Yet (1)	Developing (2)	Proficient (3)	Advanced (4)
Subject link	No clear curriculum link	Vague link to subject	Clear link to subject and topic	Strong link with learning objectives
Learning objectives	No objectives identified	One objective mentioned	2–3 clear learning objectives	Comprehensive objectives with assessment
Project design	Project does not teach/practice topic	Project somewhat relates to topic	Project effectively teaches/practices topic	Project innovatively teaches topic
Classroom use	No plan for classroom use	Vague idea	Clear plan for how to use in class	Detailed lesson plan or activity outline

Evidence: Project description, lesson plan draft, presentation to group.

Component	Not Yet (1)	Developing (2)	Proficient (3)	Advanced (4)
Self-assessment	Does not self-assess	Uses rubric with guidance	Self-assesses using rubric	Reflects deeply and identifies improvements
Peer feedback	Does not give or receive feedback	Gives basic feedback	Gives constructive feedback using criteria	Gives detailed, helpful feedback
Sharing	Does not share project	Shares when asked	Shares project and explains	Shares enthusiastically and helps others learn
Remixing	Does not remix	Remixes with help	Remixes and adds feature	Remixes creatively and improves original

Evidence: Reflection journal, peer feedback notes, sharing demonstration.

During the day: Use Rubrics 1 and 2 to observe progress in activities and project development.
After project completion: Use Rubrics 2 and 3 for project evaluation.
End of day: Use Rubric 4 for reflection and sharing assessment.
Scale: 1 = Not yet, 2 = Developing, 3 = Proficient, 4 = Advanced. "Proficient" for Day 2: most criteria at 2–3; one complete project with curriculum link.
Feedback: Give one strength and one next step (e.g. "Great use of cloning! Try adding broadcasting for next project.")

Day 2 builds on Day 1; if someone struggled with basics, provide extra support or pair work.
Emphasise curriculum integration; this helps teachers see immediate classroom value.
Allow time for extended project development; this is a key outcome.
Link to Day 3: "Tomorrow we connect Scratch to physical hardware with Arduino!"