❤️ Service-Oriented STEM Rubric¶
This rubric evaluates how effectively C-STEM lessons connect STEM skills to Catholic Social Teaching and service to others—the "Hands and Feet of Christ" approach to STEM education.
"Why do we do science and engineering? Not to make as much money as we can... but to build up our brothers and sisters in Christ."
📋 Overview¶
Purpose: Evaluate the service orientation and Catholic Social Teaching integration in STEM projects and lessons
Users: Teachers, project mentors, STEM fair judges, students (self-assessment)
Scoring: 4 = Exemplary, 3 = Proficient, 2 = Developing, 1 = Beginning
🙏 Catholic Social Teaching Principles¶
C-STEM education should connect to these seven themes of Catholic Social Teaching:
| Principle | STEM Connection |
|---|---|
| Life and Dignity of the Human Person | Technology should enhance human dignity, not diminish it |
| Call to Family, Community, and Participation | STEM skills build up communities and families |
| Rights and Responsibilities | We have responsibility to use technology ethically |
| Option for the Poor and Vulnerable | STEM can address needs of the marginalized |
| Dignity of Work and Rights of Workers | Technology should support, not replace, human work |
| Solidarity | We are one human family; STEM connects us globally |
| Care for God's Creation | Environmental stewardship through science and engineering |
📊 Rubric Categories¶
Category 1: Catholic Social Teaching Connection¶
Key Question: Does the lesson/project explicitly connect to Catholic Social Teaching?
| Score | Descriptor | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 4 - Exemplary | CST is central to the STEM application | • Specific CST principle identified and explored • Students articulate CST connection clearly • STEM skill applied directly to CST principle • Deep understanding of "why we learn" evident |
| 3 - Proficient | CST connection is clear and meaningful | • CST principle referenced explicitly • Students understand connection to serving others • Discussion of ethical implications included • Faith-based purpose acknowledged |
| 2 - Developing | CST is mentioned but not deeply connected | • Generic "helping others" without CST specificity • Connection is present but superficial • Limited discussion of Catholic perspective • Students may not internalize the connection |
| 1 - Beginning | CST is absent from the lesson/project | • No mention of Catholic Social Teaching • STEM presented without service orientation • Secular approach only • Missed opportunity for faith integration |
Category 2: "Hands and Feet of Christ" Application¶
Key Question: Does the STEM work demonstrate active service to others?
| Score | Descriptor | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 4 - Exemplary | Students actively serve others through STEM | • Real beneficiaries identified and engaged • Project solves actual community need • Students witness impact of their work • Service extends beyond classroom |
| 3 - Proficient | Clear service application is identified | • Specific service application discussed • Students can explain who benefits • Connection to real needs is evident • Some engagement with community |
| 2 - Developing | Service is theoretical rather than applied | • Discussion of potential service uses • No actual beneficiaries identified • Service connection remains abstract • Limited community engagement |
| 1 - Beginning | Service orientation is absent | • No connection to helping others • Self-focused or purely academic • No discussion of STEM serving community • "Hands and Feet" approach not evident |
Examples of "Hands and Feet of Christ" STEM:
-
Designing assistive devices for persons with disabilities
-
Creating environmental solutions for community
-
Building technology to help elderly or homebound
-
Engineering solutions for developing communities
-
Coding apps that teach or assist others
Category 3: Care for God's Creation¶
Key Question: Does the lesson/project demonstrate environmental stewardship?
| Score | Descriptor | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 4 - Exemplary | Environmental stewardship is central theme | • Explicit connection to papal teachings on environment • Students design with sustainability in mind • Creation care is integral to the project • Students can articulate Catholic view of stewardship |
| 3 - Proficient | Environmental impact is addressed | • Discussion of environmental considerations • Students aware of creation care responsibility • Sustainable practices encouraged • Faith-based stewardship mentioned |
| 2 - Developing | Environment is acknowledged but not prioritized | • Brief mention of environmental impact • No explicit connection to Catholic teaching • Stewardship not central to design • Missed opportunities for deeper integration |
| 1 - Beginning | Environmental stewardship is ignored | • No mention of environmental impact • No discussion of creation care • Wasteful practices not addressed • Catholic stewardship teaching absent |
Category 4: Human Dignity in Technology¶
Key Question: Does the lesson/project respect and enhance human dignity?
| Score | Descriptor | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 4 - Exemplary | Human dignity is explicitly honored and enhanced | • Discussion of how technology serves human dignity • Ethical considerations are central • Students critique technology that diminishes dignity • Design choices reflect dignity of all persons |
| 3 - Proficient | Human dignity considerations are addressed | • Ethical implications discussed • Students aware of dignity concerns • Responsible technology use emphasized • Some critique of technology misuse |
| 2 - Developing | Human dignity is acknowledged but not explored | • Brief mention of ethical considerations • Limited discussion of dignity implications • Responsible use mentioned but not emphasized • Students may not fully grasp importance |
| 1 - Beginning | Human dignity is not considered | • No discussion of ethical implications • Technology presented without dignity lens • No critique of potentially harmful uses • Catholic view of human person absent |
Category 5: Solidarity and Community¶
Key Question: Does the lesson/project build solidarity and community?
| Score | Descriptor | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 4 - Exemplary | Solidarity and community are deeply integrated | • Global perspective included (one human family) • Project builds connections across boundaries • Students collaborate meaningfully • Community partnerships evident |
| 3 - Proficient | Community building is evident | • Collaboration emphasized and practiced • Connection to wider community discussed • Students work toward common good • Some community engagement |
| 2 - Developing | Community is mentioned but not developed | • Collaboration occurs but not emphasized • Limited discussion of community impact • Solidarity concept not explored • Missed opportunities for partnership |
| 1 - Beginning | Individualism rather than solidarity | • Work is purely individual • No community connection • Common good not discussed • Solidarity concept absent |
📊 Scoring Summary¶
Project/Lesson Evaluation Form¶
Title: ________________________________
Date: _____________ Evaluator: _________________
| Category | Score (1-4) | Evidence/Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Catholic Social Teaching Connection | ||
| "Hands and Feet of Christ" Application | ||
| Care for God's Creation | ||
| Human Dignity in Technology | ||
| Solidarity and Community | ||
| TOTAL | /20 |
Score Interpretation¶
| Total Score | Rating | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 18-20 | Exemplary | Outstanding service orientation; model for others |
| 14-17 | Proficient | Strong service connection; meets C-STEM standards |
| 10-13 | Developing | Service present but needs strengthening |
| 5-9 | Beginning | Service orientation needs significant development |
💡 Student Self-Assessment Questions¶
Students can use these questions to evaluate their own projects:
Before Starting¶
- Who will benefit from what I'm creating?
- How does this project care for God's creation?
- How does this respect the dignity of every person?
- How can I work together with others on this?
- Which Catholic Social Teaching principle does this connect to?
During the Project¶
- Am I thinking about others as I design and build?
- Would Jesus be pleased with how I'm using my talents?
- Am I being a good steward of resources?
- Am I treating my teammates with respect?
- Am I learning something that can help my community?
After Completing¶
- Who was helped by my project?
- How did this project show care for creation?
- Did my project honor human dignity?
- How did I grow in solidarity with others?
- How can I continue using STEM to serve?
📋 Reflection Prompts¶
For Individual Lessons¶
"Today we learned [STEM skill]. How can we use this to serve our brothers and sisters?"
For Projects¶
"The STEM skills we developed can be used to help others. How might you use what you learned to be the 'hands and feet of Christ' in your community?"
For STEM Fair Projects¶
"Explain how your project connects to Catholic Social Teaching. Who benefits from your work, and how does it honor God's creation and human dignity?"
🎯 Service-Oriented STEM Project Ideas¶
Option for the Poor and Vulnerable¶
-
Design low-cost water filtration for developing communities
-
Create assistive technology for persons with disabilities
-
Build communication devices for elderly or isolated
-
Develop educational tools for underserved students
Care for God's Creation¶
-
Engineer renewable energy solutions
-
Design waste reduction systems
-
Create habitat restoration plans
-
Build pollution monitoring devices
Solidarity and Community¶
-
Develop technology connecting isolated individuals
-
Create community resource-sharing apps
-
Design collaborative problem-solving tools
-
Build bridges between diverse communities
Human Dignity¶
-
Design technology that protects privacy
-
Create accessible design for all abilities
-
Develop ethical AI applications
-
Build systems that support human work
Rubric Version: 2.0
Framework: C-STREAM
Based on: Catholic Social Teaching & Service Learning Best Practices