School Olympics Scoreboard Showdown

Learning Goals & Products

Learning Goals

Students will be able to define event rules, measurable scoring criteria, and safety constraints for a school Olympics challenge.

Students will be able to generate and annotate multiple event designs for a school Olympics challenge using sketches and materials plans.

Students will be able to calculate and compare scores for school Olympics events using measurement, fractions, decimals, averages, range, tables, and graphs.

Students will be able to evaluate and justify the best event design by using test data, a decision matrix, and evidence-based trade-offs.

Students will be able to collaborate and communicate clearly while running, revising, and presenting a school Olympics station with accurate procedures and scores.

Products

individual

Engineering Design Notebook for One School Olympics Event

Each student creates a notebook packet showing at least three original event concepts, labeled sketches, a decision matrix, and a test-and-revise plan for one chosen event. The notebook proves individual understanding of fair scoring, quantitative comparison, and evidence-based design choices.

team

Class School Olympics Event Station with Live Scoreboard and Rule Display

Teams build and run one functional Olympics station, revise it after a test round, and present a live scoreboard with rules, scores, and a brief explanation of design trade-offs. The station must show how the team’s final solution came from comparing ideas and using data, not just one person’s preference.

Rubric

Competency Progression Rubric Competency-first rubric

Category	Learning Goal	Stage 1	Stage 2	Stage 3	Stage 4
Deeper Learning Competencies	Collaboration	I can take a role in my team during event design and testing (like runner, scorer, rule-checker, or materials manager) and follow our shared plan to complete the rotation or revise our scorecard.	I can work with my teammates to co-design fair-play rules and station procedures, share my ideas respectfully, and help us reach agreement when we disagree about scoring or instructions.	I can collaboratively test our event challenge with classmates, use evidence from scorecards to spot patterns or issues, and revise our rules and procedures with my team by explaining what we changed and why.	I can lead shared decision-making by organizing our workflow, resolving conflict using fair and specific feedback, and consistently coordinate roles to improve the accuracy, consistency, and clarity of our scoring system across rotations.
Deeper Learning Competencies	Effective Communication	I can listen to my teammates’ ideas during scoring-rule discussions and use clear, respectful words to share my own suggestion for how to record results on a scorecard.	I can explain my event rules and scoring choices using specific details (what to measure, how to score, and where to record it) and I can ask and answer questions to make sure classmates understand.	I can justify why a scoring system is fair by using math language and evidence from our tests (like comparisons with another group’s results) and I can respectfully critique others’ reasoning to improve our process.	I can communicate a polished event-station plan for the showcase by presenting my scoring system and “checks for accuracy” clearly with visuals (tables/graphs or scorecard diagrams), and I can adjust my explanation based on feedback to ensure others can run and score the event consistently.
Deeper Learning Competencies	Critical Thinking & Problem Solving	I can make sense of a scoring or rules problem by identifying what is being measured, what information is needed, and what result the event needs to produce (winner/score) I can persist to try a first approach and check whether my scores match the rules.	I can use math and tools strategically (scorecards, tables, averages/ranges, measurement strategies) to solve how to score a new or revised event I can look for patterns or structure in the data to decide what calculations and representations fit the event and explain my reasoning using evidence.	I can critique scoring methods by comparing results from my team with another group and using math to explain why scores agree or disagree I can revise rules or procedures to improve fairness and accuracy, constructing a clear argument that connects my calculations to the scoring structure.	I can independently design, test, and refine an event’s scoring system by anticipating likely confusion or measurement issues and building checks for accuracy I can justify why my system is fair across events, critique others’ reasoning respectfully, and use precise math language and representations to support my decisions.
Deeper Learning Competencies	Content Expertise	I can use precise measurements and record results on a scorecard (with units and clear labels) for a simple event, and I can follow the scoring rules to calculate totals correctly.	I can make sense of a scoring problem by explaining what the numbers mean in my event, choosing tools (rulers, cups, timers, tables) to support my calculations, and checking my results for errors.	I can use structure in data by organizing scores in a table/graph and calculating averages and ranges to determine winners, and I can critique and revise my scoring approach when another team’s results differ.	I can justify a fair scoring system across events using math reasoning and precise data displays (tables/graphs, averages/ranges), critique others’ reasoning with evidence, and independently revise rules or procedures to improve accuracy and consistency.
Deeper Learning Competencies	Self Directed Learning	I can use a clear checklist to plan my next steps for improving event rules or scorecards, and I can follow feedback from my teacher and peers to make one specific revision during practice rounds I can explain what changed and what I will try next.	I can monitor my progress during event testing by checking my scorecard or station procedure against the class scoring rules, then adjust based on peer feedback and my own observations I can persist when results are confusing and make at least two targeted revisions to improve fairness or accuracy.	I can independently troubleshoot scoring problems by identifying patterns in errors (like inconsistent measurements or confusing instructions) and using math tools or structures to fix them I can critique my own work using evidence from comparisons with another group, then revise my rules so scoring stays consistent across trials.	I can direct my learning by setting goals, using feedback and data from multiple rounds to refine my event system, and deciding which revisions will most improve precision and fairness I can justify my improvements with clear evidence (tables/graphs/checked totals) and reflect on how my strategies and reasoning evolved over the project.