| Criteria | Not Attempted | Unsatisfactory | Developing | Competent | Strong | Exemplary |
| Technical Execution (5%) |
Is not working whatsoever. | Issues in technical execution distracts from the content and experience. | It is working to showcase work, but with some small issues. | Uses expected programs with competent understanding. | Uses expected programs with advanced understanding. | Distinguished work beyond expectations. |
| Communication Organization (20%) |
No proof of structure. | Does not include enough content to communicate ideas and/or shows little evidence of ways to communicate to the viewer. | Communicates ideas and content in a way that is unclear and/or wordy, or lacks consistency. | Attempt at a particular vision in organization and wording, even if sometimes the vision is not fully realized or slightly confused. In-class lessons are evident in choices. | Communicates and represents ideas in a way that is clear and concise, and starting to develop a particular vision. | Communicates and organizes information in a way that is particular to the vision of the entire ePortfolio and/or who it represents and how. |
| Self-Representation (15%) | No attempt. | Does not describe experience, is vague or does not provide insight or interpretation towards development of self-representation. | Attempt towards a biographical introduction, acknowledges few values, beliefs, or preconceptions. | Evidence of “Developing” level as well as an explicit link of experience, content, descriptions of work to self-concept. | Evidence of “Competent” level as well as links between design and navigation, starts to provide in-depth interpretation of content towards a clear and influential development of self-concept. | Up to highest level of insight and adds complexity in viewpoints, and contextualizes as well as analyzes experiences and how knowledge was transformed. |
| Creativity (15%) | No evidence of creative thought. | Use of predictable conventions to sort or describe material, not really indicative of the specific individual, and at an unconsidered level. | Uses generic conventions/expectations of ePortfolio creation with high craftsmanship and done well. | Though mostly conventional, it starts to acknowledge divergent perspective, starting to develop insight. | Provides unique and individual ideas and solutions beyond conventions or assignment details. | Exceeds expectations with meaningful transformation of content, design and execution, synthesizes alternate and divergent perspectives/ideas fully to create new knowledge. |
| Content & Descriptions (25%) |
Does not include enough content. | Only includes one artifact, making it difficult to compare how different materials are handled, and/or missing descriptions/captions leaves a viewer lost. | Two or more artifacts creating content that starts to develop understanding of work or content is provided but not properly articulated. | Artifacts are generally appropriate. Delivery, media formats, and amount of content effectively enhance portfolio experience, with decent attempt at descriptions. Referencing and copyright, spelling and grammar have no errors, and readability facilitates the readers’ accessibility to the content. | Artifacts illustrate student’s knowledge, show variety and evidence of future thinking and/or future additions. Explains work shown in the ePortfolio clearly. | Content frames the ePortfolio, includes a variety of artifacts and media or display formats, are effective, specific and illustrate student’s knowledge of concepts to showcase relevant skills, thinking and abilities. Clearly and concisely describes all artifacts. Explains all artifacts’ relevance to the concepts in ePortfolio. |
| Layout & Design (20%) |
Does not relay any layout or design decisions. | The portfolio is difficult to read. Formatting is awkward and design features detract from the content. Most of the pages are not balanced or appear cluttered and backgrounds are overdone and are distracting or do not compliment the content. | The portfolio is somewhat difficult to read. Formatting is awkward and design features detract from the content. Some of the pages are not balanced and backgrounds are overdone and are distracting or do not compliment the content. | Design features, such as font and size, titles, subtitles, page headings, and paragraphs enhance the portfolio and are clear to read. On the majority of pages, content is well-balanced and pictures and backgrounds, overall, do not detract from the content. The e-portfolio is well organized, and easy to navigate. It is free of unnecessary items or well-edited. | The e-portfolio is attractive, well organized, and easy to navigate. It is free of unnecessary items. The portfolio has an understanding of different sections to contribute to the whole. | The eportfolio is easy to read. Design features, such as font and size, titles, subtitles, page headings, and paragraphs enhance the portfolio. The pages are well-balanced and pictures and backgrounds do not detract from the content. |