Rubrics

Rubrics are simply scoring guides or grading criteria that enable the professor and the students to identify the various elements of a complex assignment and the qualities evaluated for performance on each element.  There are many ways to format rubrics, but checklists, analytic rubrics and holistic scoring guides are three common practices.  California State Fresno has a rubrics library with a number of disciplinary examples:  http://csufresno.edu/irap/assessment/rubric.shtml.   Here are some general examples of a Checklist, Analytic, and Holistic rubric.  

A. Final Paper Checklist

Content The paper… Addresses the topic or question Accurately presents assigned authors’ viewpoints Provides sufficient textual evidence to support the argument Structure The introduction… Is present in the paper Includes a clearly stated thesis Indicates how the paper is organized The body… Contains a complete discussion and support Each paragraph… Includes a topic sentence Develops one main idea Has a transition sentence linking it to the next paragraph The conclusion… Recaps the thesis statement and the essay’s main points Presents a closing statement of the writer’s position

Organization and Development The entire composition… Is logically organized Has a solid argument with supporting evidence Main points… Are relevant to the thesis statement Are discussed without too much repetition   Style… Is concise and precise Is free of misspellings Is free of grammatical mistakes Lacks incomplete sentences Uses correct punctuation Includes subject/verb agreement Uses pronouns correctly Is free of jargon and clichés Cites references correctly

          

B. Analytic Rubric for Biological Research Project

Rubric for Scientific Experiment in Biology Capstone Course, by Virginia Johnson Anderson, Towson University, Towson, MD. Taken from Barbara Walvoord, “How to Make Grading, Fair, Time-Efficient, and Conducive to Learning,” presented at George Washington University, May, 2009.

Assignment: Semester-long assignment to design an original experiment, carry it out, and write it up in scientific report format.  Students are to determine which of two brands of a commercial product (e.g. two brands of popcorn) are “best.”  They must base their judgment on at least four experimental factors (e.g. “% of kernels popped” is an experimental factor.  Price is not, because it is written on the package).

Title
5 -            Is appropriate in tone and structure to science journal; contains necessary descriptors, brand names, and allows reader to anticipate design.
4 -            Is appropriate in tone and structure to science journal; most descriptors present; identifies function of experimentation, suggests design, but lacks brand names.
3 -            Identifies function, brand name, but does not allow reader to anticipate design.
2 -            Identifies function or brand name, but not both; lacks design information or is
misleading
1 -  Is patterned after another discipline or missing.
Introduction
5 -  Clearly identifies the purpose of the research; identifies interested audiences(s); adopts an appropriate tone.
4 -  Clearly identifies the purpose of the research; identifies interested audience(s).
3 -  Clearly identifies the purpose of the research.
2 -  Purpose present in Introduction, but must be identified by reader.
1 -  Fails to identify the purpose of the research.
Scientific Format Demands
5 -  All material placed in the correct sections; organized logically within each section; runs parallel among different sections.
4 -  All material placed in correct sections; organized logically within sections, but may lack parallelism among sections.
3 -  Material place is right sections but not well organized within the sections; disregards parallelism.
2 -  Some materials are placed in the wrong sections or are not adequately organized wherever they are placed.
1 -  Material placed in wrong sections or not sectioned; poorly organized wherever placed.
Materials and Methods Section
5 -  Contains effective, quantifiable, concisely-organized information that allows the experiment to be replicated; is written so that all information inherent to the document can be related back to this section; identifies sources of all data to be collected; identifies sequential information in an appropriate chronology; does not contain unnecessary, wordy descriptions of procedures.
4 -  As above, but contains unnecessary information, and/or wordy descriptions within the section.
3 -  Presents an experiment that is definitely replicable; all information in document may be related to this section; however, fails to identify some sources of data and/or presents sequential information in a disorganized, difficult pattern.
2-   Presents an experiment that is marginally replicable; parts of the basic design must be inferred by the reader; procedures not quantitatively described; some information in Results or Conclusions cannot be anticipated by reading the Methods and Materials section.
1 -  Describes the experiment so poorly or in such a nonscientific way that is cannot be replicated.
Non-experimental Information
5 -  Student researches and includes price and other non-experimental information that would be expected to be significant to the audience in determining the better product, or specifically states non-experimental factors excluded by design; interjects these at appropriate positions in text and/or develops a weighted rating scale; integrates non-experimental information in the Conclusions.
4 -  Student acts as above, but is somewhat less effective in developing the significance of the non-experimental information.
3 -  Student introduces price and other non-experimental information, but does not integrate them into Conclusions.
2 -  Student researches and includes price effectively; does not include or specifically exclude other non-experimental information.
1 -  Student considers price and/or other non-experimental variables as research variables; fails to identify the significance of these factors to the research.
Designing an Experiment
5 -  Student selects experimental factors that are appropriate to the research purpose and audience; measures adequate aspects of these selected factors; establishes discrete subgroups for which data significance may vary; student demonstrates an ability to eliminate bias from the design and bias-ridden statements from the research; student selects appropriate sample size, equivalent groups, and statistics; student designs a superior experiment.
4 -  As above, but student designs an adequate experiment.
3 -  Student selects experimental factors that are appropriate to the research purpose and audience; measures adequate aspects of these selected factors; establishes discrete subgroups for which data significance may vary; research is weakened by bias OR by sample size of less than 10.
2 -  As above, but research is weakened by bias AND inappropriate sample size
1 -  Student designs a poor experiment.

Defining Operationally
5 -  Student constructs a stated comprehensive operational definition and well-developed specific operational definitions.
4 -  Student constructs an implied comprehensive operational definition and well-developed specific operational definitions.
3 -  Student constructs an implied comprehensive operational definition (possible less clear) and some specific operational definitions.
2 -  Student constructs specific operational definitions, but fails to construct a comprehensive definition.
1 -  Student lacks understanding of operation definition.
Controlling Variables
5 -  Student demonstrates, by written statement, the ability to control variables by experimental control and by randomization; student makes reference to, or implies, factors to be disregarded by reference to pilot or experience; superior overall control of variables.
4 -  As above, but student demonstrates an adequate control of variables.
3 -  Student demonstrates the ability to control important variables experimentally; Methods and Materials section does not indicate knowledge of randomization and/or selected disregard of variables.
2 -  Student demonstrates the ability to control some, but not all, of the important variables experimentally.
1 -  Student demonstrates a lack of understanding about controlling variables.
Collecting Data and Communicating Results
5 -  Student selects quantifiable experimental factors and/or defines and establishes quantitative units of comparison; measures the quantifiable factors and/or units in appropriate quantities or intervals; student selects appropriate statistical information to be utilized in the results; when effective, student displays results in graphs with correctly labeled axes; data are presented to the reader in text as well as graphic forms; tables or graphs have self-contained headings.
4 -  As 5 above, but the student did not prepare self-contained headings for tables or graphs.
3 -  As 4 above, but data reported in graphs or tables contain materials that are irrelevant. and/or not statistically appropriate.
2 -  Student selects quantifiable experimental factors and/or defines and establishes quantitative units of comparison; fails to select appropriate quantities or intervals and/or fails to display information graphically when appropriate.
1 -  Student does not select, collect, and/or communicate quantifiable results.
Interpreting Data: Drawing Conclusions/Implications
5 -  Student summarizes the purpose and findings of the research; student draws inferences that are consistent with the data and scientific reasoning and relates these to interested audiences; student explains expected results and offers explanations and/or suggestions for further research for unexpected results; student presents data honestly, distinguishes between fact and implication, and avoids overgeneralizing; student organizes non-experimental information to support conclusion; student accepts or rejects the hypothesis.
4 -  As 5 above, but student does not accept or reject the hypothesis.
3 -  As 4 above, but the student overgeneralizes and/or fails to organize non-experimental information to support conclusions.
2 -  Student summarizes the purpose and findings of the research; student explains expected results, but ignores unexpected results.
1 -  Student may or may not summarize the results, but fails to interpret their significance to interested audiences.

Student Scores for Science Reports, Before and After Anderson Made Pedagogical Changes

Trait	Year 1	Year 2
Title	2.95	3.22
Introduction	3.18	3.64
Scientific Format	3.09	3.32
Methods and Materials	3.00	3.55
Non-Experimental Info	3.18	3.50
Designing the Experiment	2.68	3.32
Defining Operationally	2.68	3.50
Controlling Variables	2.73	3.18
Collecting Data	2.86	3.36
Interpreting Data	2.90	3.59
Overall	2.93	3.42

C. Holistic Grading Rubric for Essays

A.  A paper that demonstrates the student

• understands the arguments being made by scholars in assigned reading
• has developed a compelling and convincing thesis/argument distinct from that being made by the authors under consideration
• advances evidence in an original manner (ie does not simply replicate the argument of one of the authors being critiqued) to make a convincing point.

B.  A paper that demonstrates the student

• understands most aspects of the arguments being made by scholars in assigned reading
• attempts to advance an argument distinct from the authors, though the argument is not as convincing or fully developed as would be found in an “A” paper
• advances evidence that supports the thesis statement with some (but not complete) success.

C.  A paper that demonstrates the student

• understands some of the arguments being made by scholars in assigned reading
• does not advance a thesis/argument distinct from the authors
• by and large repeats the evidence used by authors to draw the same conclusions as authors. This is a descriptive rather than argumentative essay, even if it recapitulates the arguments of the author.

D. A paper that demonstrates the student

• does not really grasp significant aspects of the arguments being made by scholars
• makes some points, but the points are not necessarily part of a larger, coherent argument.

F.  A paper that is not turned in, and/or shows no knowledge of the material studied.

Grammar: Papers that are poorly written will be marked down to a “-“ grade. Papers that are well written will be marked up to a “+” grade.

Grammar includes: following conventions of writing, inclusion of title, full title page, numbering pages, proper footnote citation, etc.