Scoring RUBRICS

(( Process
Process Oriented
Oriented Performance-Based
Performance-Based Assessment
Assessment ))
Understanding Rubrics
 Gloria Salandanan, PhD: An authentic assessment toolwhich
measures students work.
 Nelia Prieto, PhD, PAFTE: It is a scoring guide seeks to evaluate
the quality of a student’s performance.
 Martin-Kniep (2000): Rating scale that defines, differentiates
levels of performance.

Uses of Rubrics:
The main purpose of rubrics is to assess performances.
Assignment papers,
Oral presentations/ recitations,
Artistic performances,
Individual and group projects.
Advantages of Rubrics:
 Instructional. Help students evaluate and reflect on their work and
instruction.
 Students’ guidelines. Guide the students in completing
performance assessment projects.
 Teacher-student communication. Serves both the teacher and
students clarify and communicate the teacher’s expectation.
 Grading student’s progress more objective. Helps the students to
quality work toward specific goals and divert their efforts
accordingly.
 Time-saving. Reduces time spent in grading.
 Reduces systematic bias. More accurate and efficient evaluation of
students’ performance. Thus, ensures that the work is being judged
consistently.
3 Important Elements

1. Criteria
2. Level of performance
3. Descriptors
Criteria
 One or more traits or dimensions that serve as the
basis for judging the student response.

Level of Performance
 A scale of values in which to rate each dimensions.

Descriptors
 Spell out what is expected of student at each level of
performance for each criterion.
 There are two predominant types of rubrics;
Holistic and Analytical
Holistic Rubric
 Requires the teacher to score the overall process or product
as a whole, without judging the component parts separately.

 A holistic rubric consists of a single scale with all criteria to be

included in the evaluation being considered together (e.g.,
clarity, organization, and mechanics). With a holistic rubric the
rater assigns a single score (usually on a 1 to 4 or 1 to 6 point
scale) based on an overall judgment of the student work.
 Holistic Rubrics
 Uses criterion-based standards by providing
description of the different levels of performance like:

Excellent, Very Good, Good,

Limited, Poor, Unacceptable.
Holistic Rubrics

 Advantages: Takes less time and grading is faster. Quick

scoring. Provides overview of student achievement.

 Disadvantages: does not provide detailed information,

may be difficult to provide one overall score.
Analytic Rubric
a.k.a. Dimensional Rubric (Navarro, Santos 2012)

 An analytic rubric breaks down the characteristics of an assignment into

parts, allowing the scorer to itemize and define exactly what aspects are strong,
and which ones need improvement.

Resembles a grid with the domains (dimensions) listed in the leftmost

column and with levels of performance (i.e., performance descriptors,
criteria) listed across the top row often using numbers and/or descriptive
tags. The cells within the center of the rubric may be left blank or may contain
descriptions of what the specified criteria look like for each level of performance.
When scoring with an analytic rubric each of the domains is scored
individually.
Analytic Rubric
 Advantages : It gives students a clearer picture of why they got the
score they got. It gives the ability to justify a score on paper,
without having to explain everything in a later conversation.
More detailed feedback, scoring more consistent, provides more
guidance for instructional planning.

 Disadvantages: Creating them takes a lot of time. Writing up

descriptors of satisfactory work — completing the “3” column in this
rubric, for example — is enough of a challenge on its own. Have to
define all the ways the work, is a big, big task. And once all that
work is done, students won’t necessarily read the whole thing. And
that means they won’t clearly understand what’s expected of them.
 Constructing a Rubric:

Tip: Rubrics are generally designed to be simple, explicit, and easily

understood. Rubrics may help students see connections between learning
(what will be taught) and assessment (what will be evaluated).

1. Know the goals for instruction- what are the learning outcomes?
2. Decide on the structure of the rubric- holistic or analytical--what fits best for
the task?
3. Determine the levels of performance- are there levels of performance
specific to each criteria?
4. Share the rubric with your students. Students should have an opportunity to
see, discuss or even design the rubric prior to the performance or the activity.
What fits best for the task…
Is it Holistic or Analytic?
Use a holistic rubric when:
You want a quick snapshot of student performance level.
For summative assessment and you will not really use the information for
anything except a grade.

 
Use an analytic rubric when:
You want to see relative strengths and weaknesses.
You want detailed feedback.
You want to assess complicated skills or performance.
You want students to self-assess their understanding or performance.
You want information for instructional planning.
Focusing on the criteria one at a time is better for instruction and better
for formative assessment
 Level of performance
Criteria
 A scale of values in which to rate each
 One or more traits or dimensions dimensions.
that serve as the basis for
Descriptors
judging the student response.
 Spell out what is expected of student at
each level of performance for each criterion.
  Holistic Rubric Oral Presentation
             
5 Excellent: The student clearly describes the question studied and provides strong reasons for
  its importance. Specific information is given to support the conclusions that are drawn and
  described. The delivery is engaging and sentence structure is consistently correct. Eye contact
  is made and sustained throughout the presentation. There is strong evidence of preparation,
  organization, and enthusiasm for the topic. The visual aid is used to make the presentation
  more effective. Questions from the audience are clearly answered with specific and appropriate
  information.  
                   
4 Very Good: The student described the question studied and provides reasons for its
  importance. An adequate amount of information is given to support the conclusions that are
  drawn and described. The delivery and sentence structure are generally correct. There is
  evidence of preparation, organization, and enthusiasm for the topic. The visual aid is
  mentioned and used. Questions from the audience are answered clearly.  
                   
3 Good: The student describes the question studied and conclusions are stated, but supporting
  information is not as strong as a 4 or 5. The delivery and sentence structure are generally
  correct. There is some indication of preparation and organization. The visual aid is mentioned.
  Questions from the audience are answered.  
                   
2 Limited: The student states the question studied, but fails to fully describe it. No conclusions
  are given to answer the question. The delivery and sentence structure is understandable, but
  with some errors. Evidence of preparation and organization is lacking. The visual aid may or
  may not be mentioned. Questions from the audience are answered with only the most basic
  response.  
                   
1 Poor: The student makes a presentation without stating the question or its importance. The
  topic is unclear and no adequate conclusions are stated. The delivery is difficult to follow.
  There is no indication of preparation or organization. Questions from the audience receive only
  the most basic, or no, response.  
                   
0 No oral presentation is attempted.  
                   
“One of the best known analytic rubrics used for writing assessment in
the field of English as a second language (ESL) was developed by
Hughey et al. (1983, p. 140). This rubric has five categories—content,
organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. Drawing
heavily upon characteristics of the Hughey et al. scale, Tedick and Klee
developed an analytic rubric for use in scoring essays written for an
immersion quarter for undergraduates studying Spanish (Klee, Tedick
, & Cohen, 1995, p. 35)."

Analytic Writing Scale for the Spanish Foreign Language

Immersion Program
University of Minnesota, Revised July, 1996
ORGANIZATION — 20 Points Possible

Score Range Criteria Comments

Excellent to Very Good — well-framed and

organized (with clear introduction, conclusion),
20 - 18
coherent , succinct, cohesive (excellent use of
connective words)

Good to Average — adequate, but loose

organization with introduction and conclusion
(though they may be limited or one of the two
17 - 14
may be missing), somewhat coherent, more
wordy rather than succinct, somewhat cohesive
(good use of connective words)

Fair — lacks good organization (no evidence of

introduction, conclusion), ideas may be
13 - 10 disconnected, confused, lacks coherence, wordy
and repetitive , lacks consistent use of cohesive
elements

Poor — confusing, disconnected organization,

9-7 lacks coherence, so much so that writing is
difficult to follow, lacks cohesion
LANGUAGE USE/GRAMMAR/MORPHOLOGY — 25 Points Possible

Score Range Criteria Comments

Excellent to Very Good — great variety of

grammatical forms (e.g., range of indicative verb
forms; use of subjunctive) , complex sentence
structure (e.g., compound sentences, embedded
25 - 22
clauses), evidence of "Spanish-like" construction,
mastery of agreement (subj/verb;
number/gender), very few errors (if any) overall
with none that obscure meaning

Good to Average — some variety of grammatical

forms (e.g., attempts, though not always
accurate, of range of verb forms, use of
subjunctive), attempts, though not always
accurate, at complex sentence structure (e.g.,
21 - 18
compound sentences, embedded clauses), little
evidence of "Spanish-like" construction, though
without clear translations from English,
occasional errors with agreement, some errors
(minor) that don’t obscure meaning

17 - 11 Fair — less variety of grammatical forms (e.g.,

little range of verb forms; inaccurate, if any,
 Fair — less variety of grammatical forms (e.g., little range of verb forms;
inaccurate, if any, attempts at subjunctive), simplistic sentence structure, evidence
17 - 11
of "English-like" construction (e.g., some direct translation of phrases), consistent
errors (e.g., with agreement), but few of which may obscure meaning

Poor — very little variety of grammatical forms, simplistic sentence structure that
contains consistent errors, especially with basic aspects such as agreement,
10 - 5
evidence of translation from English, frequent and consistent errors that may
obscure meaning
VOCABULARY/WORD USAGE — 20 Points Possible

Score Range Criteria Comments

Excellent to Very Good — sophisticated,

academic range , extensive variety of words ,
20 - 18
effective and appropriate word/idiom choice and
usage, appropriate register

Good to Average — good, but not extensive (less

academic), range or variety, occasional errors of
17 - 14 word/idiom choice or usage (some evidence of
invention of "false" cognates), but very few or
none that obscure meaning, appropriate register

Fair — limited and "non-academic" range

(frequent repetition of words) , more consistent
errors with word/idiom choice or usage
13 - 10 (frequent evidence of translation; invention of
"false" cognates) that may (though seldom)
obscure meaning, some evidence of
inappropriate register

Poor — very limited range of words, consistent

and frequent errors with word/idiom choice or
9-7 usage (ample evidence of translation), meaning
frequently obscured, evidence of inappropriate
register
MECHANICS — 5 Points Possible

Score Range Criteria Comments

Excellent to Very Good — demonstrates mastery

5 of conventions , few errors in spelling,
punctuation, capitalization, and use of accents

Good to Average — occasional errors in spelling,

4 punctuation, capitalization, and use of accents,
but meaning is not obscured

Fair — frequent errors in spelling, punctuation,

3 capitalization, and use of accents that at times
confuses or obscures meaning

Poor — no mastery of conventions, dominated

2 by errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization,
and use of accents
Geometry Simple Sketch Plan ( School Building)
Steps in designing Rubrics
1. Re-examine the learning
objectives to be assign by the task.

Rubrics are generally used for longer tasks or projects that involve multiple
sections or parts that will require a certain amount of subjectivity in the grading.
Consider the following questions:

 What is the main purpose of the assignment you're grading?

 What are the students supposed to have learned by completing the
assignment?
 How will you recognize a successful assignment?
 What makes a project stand out?
 What's "good enough"?
 Step 2. Identify specific
attributes.

Step 3. Brainstorm characteristics

that describe each attributes.
Step 4A   For holistic rubrics, write thorough narrative
descriptions for excellent work and poor work
incorporating each attribute into the description.
Describe the highest and lowest levels of
performance combining the descriptors for all
attributes.

Step 4B For analytical rubrics, write through narrative

descriptions. Describe the highest and lowest
levels of performance using descriptors for each
attribute separately.
 Step 5A For holistic rubrics, complete the
rubric by describing other levels on the
continuum that ranges from excellent
to poor work for the collective
attributes.

Step 5B For analytic rubrics, complete the

rubric by describing other levels on the
continuum that ranges from excellent
to poor work for each attribute. Write
descriptions for all intermediate levels
of performance for each attribute
separately.
Step 6. Collect samples of student work that
exemplify each level. These will
help you score in the future by
serving as benchmarks.

Step 7. Revise the rubric, as necessary.

Be prepared to reflect on the
effectiveness of the rubric and
revise it prior to its next
implementation.
THANK YOU
MARL DAGCUTAN SLP-C
RUBRICS