All graded assessments (quizzes, participation components, and other assignments etc.) must be accompanied by detailed grading criteria. Assessments will either have a rubric or a marking guide.
A rubric has a set of criteria with descriptors that have a numeric score on a scale from very proficient to not proficient.
A marking guide has a list of criteria with descriptors, but the criteria are not organized into levels of proficiency. Rather, the levels of proficiency have a maximum grade that students can achieve.
In best practice, students will have access to the rubric or marking guide while they complete the assignment. To that end, you must include the rubric or marking guide at the end of your written assignment instructions. It should be in the same document as the instructions.
Depending on the weight of the assignment, a rubric or marking guide can be quite simple. For larger assessments that have a greater weight, you will probably want to use a more detailed rubric or marking guide with a greater number of criteria.
Below you’ll find a sample rubric for an assignment that asked students to reflect, research, and write about an ethical dilemma in the workplace. This was a significant assignment for students, worth 20% of their total grade. You’ll notice that not all of these criteria have 5 points as the highest score.
|
Criteria |
Category |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
Reflection |
Response demonstrates an in-depth reflection of the topic. Response addresses the guiding questions with clear, concise, personal viewpoints. |
Response demonstrates a general reflection on the topic. Response addresses guiding questions with some personal viewpoints. |
Response demonstrates a minimal reflection on the topic. Response does not adequately address all guiding questions with personal viewpoints. |
Response demonstrates a lack of reflection on the topic, and/or guiding questions are absent. |
|
Research Evidence |
Ideas supported with evidence from relevant and appropriate sources throughout. |
Ideas supported with evidence from relevant, satisfactory, sources. A few sources may not be appropriate, and/or sources may be lacking throughout. |
Ideas supported with evidence from minimal sources. Significant number of sources may not be appropriate, and/or sources may be seriously lacking throughout. |
Sources are irrelevant, absent or not referenced. |
|
Organization |
|
Content presented is organized and easy to follow. |
Content presented lacks some organization and not always easy to follow. |
Content is disorganized, lacks clarity, and is not easy to follow. |
|
References |
|
All citations and references correctly follow APA format. |
Citations and/or references contain 1-3 APA errors. |
Citations and/or references contain more than 3 APA errors. |
|
Writing Conventions (spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalization) |
|
Free of writing convention errors. |
Relatively free of writing convention errors (fewer than five). |
Significant number of writing convention errors (more than five). |
|
Length |
|
|
The assignment keeps to the assigned length. |
The assignment is significantly over or under the assigned length. |
Total possible marks: /20 marks
Below is an example of a simpler rubric used to grade a student’s online discussion posts which were worth 5% of their overall grade. It has 3 criteria and only 3 categories of scoring:
|
Criteria |
Category |
||
|---|---|---|---|
|
4 |
2 |
0 |
|
|
Quality of initial post |
Posts are thoughtful and analyze the content or question asked. They make connections to the course content and/or other experiences and extend discussions already taking place or pose new possibilities or opinions not previously voiced. |
Posts are generally accurate, but their content is limited. They make vague or incomplete connections between class content and only summarize what other students have posted. They contain few novel ideas. |
Posts are incomplete. They lack sustained analysis or critique. The posts contribute few novel ideas, connections, or applications. They may veer off topic. |
|
Quality of replies to posts in the discussion community |
Post shows significant engagement with other posts. Builds o the original post, adding new, relevant content or perspective.
|
Post shows marginal effort to become involved with group. Does not contain new information or suggest a new direction in conversation. |
Posts are not completed or show little effort to participate in learning community as discussion develops.
|
|
Timeliness |
|
Posts are submitted on time, giving others an opportunity to respond. |
Post is not submitted, or it is significantly late and affects others' ability to respond.
|
Total Marks Possible: /10 marks
Here is a sample marking guide for a Written Assignment:
Breadth of Analysis – 3 marks
Depth of Analysis – 3 marks
Application of course material – 1 mark
Organization, cohesiveness, and writing style - 2 marks
Writing Mechanics – 1 mark
Total Marks: 10 marks
Some general guidelines for creating rubrics:
1. Choose grading criteria that align with the SLOs that this assignment is supposed to assess.
2. Choose 3 to 5 grading categories (highest proficiency to weakest proficiency).
3. Rubrics should not have grading categories of equal, symmetrical values. Some categories will be worth more points than others.
4. Start with the highest proficiency (and best grade) first. From this point, build the remainder of the rubric down to the lowest proficiency.
5. Use a zero as the grade for the lowest level of proficiency, but use positive language to encourage growth. The grade of zero might have the descriptor “Not enough evidence to assess understanding” or “Content is absent, irrelevant, and/or insufficient.”
6. Rubrics will and should increase student grades.
7. Rubrics do not need to be out of 100 total marks. A well-developed rubric could be out of 5-20 marks, even if the assignment has a heavy weighting overall.
This
work is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
License. Details and Exceptions.