RUBRIC DEVELOPMENT Why use rubrics Characteristics of good

RUBRIC DEVELOPMENT Why use rubrics? Characteristics of good rubrics Definition & types of rubric Strategies for rubric development SOLO taxonomy Phenomenographic sorting Using rubrics with students

SCORING RUBRIC Definition § A scoring tool that lays out the specific expectations for an assessment task (Stevens & Levi, 2005) § A set of clear explanations or criteria used to help teachers and students focus on what is valued in a subject, topic, or activity (Russell, & Airasian, 2012). Components of a rubric: § Criteria/Indicator § aspects of an assessment task which the assessor takes into account when making their judgment § May use different weightings for different criteria § Level of Attainment § often use grade level descriptors Types of rubrics: § Descriptive (Analytic), Holistic § Why and when we use particular types of rubrics

WHY USE RUBRICS? For teachers: For students: • Prompt a criterion-referenced assessment • Provide students with detailed and timely feedback • Encourage critical thinking • Facilitate communication with others involved in scoring • Help to refine teaching skills/learning activities • Clarify the teacher’s expectations of student performance • Provide informative descriptions of expected performance • Help to monitor and critique own work

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RUBRICS (1) Well defined § Clearly describe the expected level of student performance for each criterion in a rubric § Avoid general evaluative words (poor, excellent, etc. ) § Use specific objective terms (correctly identifies, uses only basic vocabulary, chooses incorrect formula… ) Context specific § Describe what teachers expect from student for a given performance or work product on a particular subject domain § Viable for instruction

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RUBRICS (2) Finite and exhaustive § Every response must be scorable § Too many score levels is confusing for students and causes disagreement among teacher scores Ordered § Represent the different levels of learning targets as defined by LP Related to Common Core theme/strand § Coherent with the cognitive complexity of the standards

ANALYTIC (DESCRIPTIVE) RUBRICS Components: (1) Task description (2) Assessment criteria (3) Performance levels Advantage: Provides judgment on each criterion Disadvantage: Time consuming to make Task Description: Criteria 1 Criteria 2 Criteria 3 Criteria 4 Total Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

HOLISTIC RUBRICS A single scale with all criteria to be included in the evaluation being considered together § Based on an overall judgment of student work Task Description: Advantage: Criteria Saves time in developing and scoring Level 5 Overall description of Level 5 Level 4 Overall description of Level 4 Disadvantage: Level 3 Overall description of Level 3 Level 2 Overall description of Level 2 Level 1 Overall description of Level 1 Does not provide specific feedback for improvement

WHEN TO USE RUBRICS On performance-based tasks: § extended response items § projects § presentations § portfolios

4 KEY STAGES IN CREATING RUBRICS Reflecting on the task & content § Learning outcomes of the unit and the particular assessment § What we want from the students, why we created this assessment, what our expectations are Listing the learning outcomes & expectations § Focus on the particular details of the task and what specific learning objectives we expect to see in the completed task Grouping & labeling the outcomes & criteria § Organize the results of reflections, group similar expectations together to become the rubric Indicators Application of a rubric format § Apply the templates & descriptions to the final form of the rubrics

STRATEGIES FOR RUBRIC DEVELOPMENT Relationship between the intended Learning Progression (LP) and rubrics § Direct use of the LP as standard reference Use of a general strategy (i. e. modified Bloom’s taxonomy or SOLO taxonomy) § Assign the target outcome as mapped onto the Cognitive Rigor Matrix as the maximum level of the rubric § Use the SOLO taxonomy as scoring Phenomenographic sorting

SOLO TAXONOMY A possible value of 0 – 4 can be used to score each question Possible Score Level 4 Extended 3 2 1 0 Responses that … not only include all relevant pieces of information, but also extend the response to integrate relevant pieces of information not in the stimulus. Relational integrate all relevant pieces of information from the stimulus. Multistructural respond to several relevant pieces of information from the stimulus. Unistructural respond to only one relevant piece of information from the stimulus. Pre-structural consist only of irrelevant information. * Modified from Wilson (2005, p. 75)

PHENOMENOGRAPHIC SORTING 1. Sort student responses into performance level piles (excellent, good, …, and poor), or in terms of the levels of understanding of the responses 2. Describe similarities within a pile and differences between § These similarities and differences can inform the different level of rubrics 3. Do sorting in pairs § § To reconfirm matches & mismatches Allow dialogue to maximize the effectiveness of rubric development

USING RUBRICS WITH STUDENTS Explain what the test will emphasize § Emphasis and expectations will be delineated in the assessment criteria in the rubrics Inform students how the assessment will be scored § Explain what each of the assessment criteria defined in the rubrics means Explain how the results will be used § Explain the importance of the test scores in the student’s learning progression

HOW TO USE RUBRICS WITH STUDENTS Make sure that the wording of the rubrics is understandable to students (simplify wording for lower grades). Works best with holistic rubrics (or with a combined version of analytic descriptions). Provide rubrics to students in advance of the administration of the assessment. Alternatively, students can be provided with a general rubric and a small number of papers (names removed). Students can score the papers in small groups; groups are required to come to consensus on the grade to be assigned.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Nitko, A. J. , & Brookhart, S. ( 200 7). E du cati onal ass ess ment of students. Upper S add le River, N J: Pe arson Ed ucat io n, Inc. Mc. Millan, J. H. (2007). Clas sroom asse ssmen t. P rin cip les an d practice for e ffe ctive s tandard-based instr uc tion (4 t h ed. ). Bo st on: Pearso n - Allyn & Bacon. O regon Departme nt of Educat io n. (20 14 , Ju ne). As ses sm ent guidance. Popham, W. J. (2014). Crite rion-r eferenced meas ur ement : A half-century wasted? Pap er pres ente d at the Annu al Meet ing o f Nati onal Co unci l o n Measurement in E duca tion, Philadephia, PA. Popham, W. J. (2014). Clas sroom asse ssmen t: W hat te ach ers needs to know. San Fran cisco, CA : P e arson Russell, M. K. , & Airasian, P. W. (20 12 ). Classr oom assessment: Concepts and a pplications. N e w York, NY: Mc. Graw -Hil l. S tevens , D. & Le vi, A. (2005). I nt rodu ct ion t o ru br ics. As assessment tool to save grading time, co nvey effec t ive fe edb ack, an d pr omote stu den t learning. Sterling: S tylus Publishing, LLC Wiha rdini, D. (2010). Asse ss ment dev elo pm ent II. U npu bl is hed manuscript. Rese arch and De velopme nt Dep art ment , Binu s Bu si ness Scho ol, Jakarta, Indo nesia. Wilson, M. (2005). Constru cting m easu res : An i tem res po nse modeling approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum As so ciat es.

CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE Rubrics PPT by the Oregon Department of Education and Berkeley Evaluation and Assessment Research Center is licensed under a CC BY 4. 0. You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. Non. Commercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. Share. Alike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. Oregon Department of Education welcomes editing of these resources and would greatly appreciate being able to learn from the changes made. To share an edited version of this resource, please contact Cristen Mc. Lean, cristen. mclean@state. or. us.