GOOD TEACHERS, CLASSROOMS, INSTRUCTION

Multiple Methods of Assessment

Overall Ultimate Goal: Student demonstrates rigorous curricular thinking and in-depth understanding of essential curricular ideas. Responses meet and often exceed expectations. They are consistently correct, complete, elegant, and use appropriate representations [words, models, paradigms, diagrams, charts, pictures, frames]]. Student work extends concepts or produces related conjectures. Generalizations and connections or links are supported by precise logical argument using multiple or unique approaches and appropriate curricular tools & techniques.

4 Demonstrates a thorough understanding of the important concepts and generalizations; &

Expresses such in elegant language;

Sees logical and creative connections or linkages; and

Elaborates on them; and

Provides new insights into some aspect of that information.

3 Displays a complete and accurate understanding of the important concepts or generalizations in own words;

Sees some connections or linkages; and

Gives standard elaboration of such; and

Provides new insight into at least one aspect of that information.

2 Displays an incomplete understanding of the important concepts or generalizations;

Expresses such some vagueness and some notable misconceptions;

Sees few connections or linkages; and

Offers no new insight into any apsect of that information.

1 Demonstrates severe misconceptions about the concepts and generalizations;

Response is riddled with underdeveloped or wrong applications;

Sees no obvious linkages or connections; and

Offers inadequate insight into the major concepts and understandings; as well as

No new insight into the area.

0 No submission or no show.

SKILLS Rubric

Level	Description	Score
	Overall Ultimate Goal: Student demonstrates mastery of the important skills and strategies. Can perform them safely and smoothly with speed, accuracy, fluency, flexibility, and adaptability, as well as without errors and with little or no conscious effort, with appropriate timing, and with no supervision required. Adapts skills to own needs and personality.
4	· Demonstrates mastery of the important strategies and skills · Can perform them safely and smoothly with fluency, flexibility, and adaptability · Performs without errors · Performs without supervision · Performs with little or no conscious effort · Performs with speed, accuracy, and agility · Adapts skills and strategies to own needs, situation, and personality
3	· Can perform the skills and strategies safely and satisfactorily · Performs with relative smoothness and reasonable fluency, flexibility, and adaptability · Makes no significant errors · Performs without supervision · Performs with little conscious effort · Performs with average speed, accuracy, and agility · Attempts to adapt skills and strategies to own needs, situation, & personality
2	· Not yet able to perform the skills and strategies satisfactorily · Performance is bordering on unsafe ad is sporadic and without smoothness, lacking fluency, flexibility, and adaptability · Makes some significant errors · Requires supervision and assistance · Performs with conscious effort · Performance lacks speed, accuracy, and ability · Unable to adapt skills and strategies to own needs, situation, and personality
1	· Unable to perform the skills and strategies satisfactorily · Performance may compromise safety and is rough, without smoothness, and lacks fluency, flexibility, and adaptability · Makes many significant errors · Requires close supervision and assistance · Performs with much conscious effort and trial-and-error attempts · Performance lacks speed, accuracy, and agility · Unable to adapt skills and strategies to own needs, situation, and personality
0	· Doesn’t show, doesn’t try, or gives no evidence of being able to perform this skill or strategy by no demonstration of it

Rubric for Content & Product

Generalization or Proposition: _____________________________________________________________________________ Performance or Product: __________________________________________________________________________________
Scale	Understanding [60%]	Performance or Product [40%]
4	Shows a sophisticated understanding of the relevant ideas or processes. The concepts, evidence, arguments, qualifications made, questions posed, and methods used are advanced, going well beyond the grasp of the subject typically found at this level.	The performance or product is highly effective. The ideas are presented in an engaging, [polished, clear, and thorough manner, and are mindful of the audience, context, and purpose. The final product or performance shows high-quality craftsmanship.
3	Shows a solid understanding of the relevant ideas or processes. The concepts, evidence, arguments, and methods used are appropriate for addressing this issues or problems. Responses show no misunderstandings of key ideas or overly simplistic approaches.	The performance or product is effective. The ideas are presented in a clear and thorough manner, showing awareness of the audience, context, and purpose.
2	Shows a somewhat naïve or limited understanding of the relevant ideas or processes. The concepts, evidence, arguments, and methods used are somewhat simple, crude, or inadequate for addressing the issues or problems. Response may reveal some misunderstandings of key ideas or methods.	The performance or product is somewhat effective. Some problems with clarity, thoroughness, delivery, and polish are evident. It is unclear whether the audience, context, and purpose have been considered.
1	Shows little apparent understanding of the relevant ideas or processes. The concepts, evidence, arguments, and methods used are inadequate for addressing the issues or problems. Response reveals major misunderstandings of key ideas or methods.	The performance or product is ineffective. One of two situations is evident: the performance is unpolished, providing little evidence of planning, practice, and consideration of purpose and audience; or the presentation is so unclear and confusing that the key points are difficult to determine.

What Is a Rubric?

A. What is a rubric? A rubric is a set of scoring guidelines for evaluating student work. Rubrics answer the questions: By what criteria should performance be judged? Where should we look and what should we look for to judge performance success? What does the range in the quality of performance look like? How do we determine validly, reliably, and fairly what score should be given and what that score means? How should the different levels of quality be described and distinguished from one another?[1]

A typical rubric:

1. Contains a scale of possible points to be assigned in scoring work, on a continuum of quality. High numbers usually are assigned to the best performances: scales typically use 4, 5 or 6 as the top score, down to 1 or 0 for the lowest scores in performance assessment.

2. Provides descriptors for each level of performance to enable more reliable and unbiased scoring.

3. Is either holistic or analytic. If holistic, a rubric has only one general descriptor for performance as a whole. If analytic, there are multiple rubrics corresponding to each independent dimension of performance being scored. Examples:

∑ “Syntax,” “focus,” and “voice” in writing

∑ “Precision of calculations” and “understanding of scientific method” in science

4. Is generic, genre or task specific. If generic, it can be used to judge a very broad performance, such as communication or problem solving. If genre specific, it applies to a more specific type of performance within the broad performance category (e.g. essay or speech or narrative as forms of communication; open-ended problems or closed-ended problems as kinds of problems solved). Task specific is unique to a single task.

5. May be longitudinal. It measures progress over time toward mastery of educational objectives such that we assess developmental change in sophistication or level of performance.

B. The best rubrics:

1. Are sufficiently generic to relate to general goals beyond an individual performance task but specific enough to enable useful and sound inferences on the task.

2. Discriminate among performances validly, not arbitrarily - by the central features of performance, not by the easiest to see, count, or score.

3. Do not combine independent criteria in one rubric.

4. Are based on analysis of many work samples, and based on the widest possible range of work samples - including valid exemplars.

5. Rely on descriptive language - what quality, or its absence, looks like - as opposed to relying heavily on mere comparatives or value language (e.g. “not as thorough as,” or “excellent product”) to make the discrimination.

6. Provide useful and apt discrimination to enable sufficiently fine judgments -- but not using so many points on the scale as to threaten reliability (typically involving, therefore, 6-12 points on a scale).

7. Use descriptors that are sufficiently rich to enable student performers to verify their score, accurately self-assess, and self-correct.

• The use of bulleted “indicators” makes the description less ambiguous- hence, more reliable - by providing examples of what to look for in recognizing each level of performance. (Indicators are useful concrete signs or examples of criteria being met, but not always reliable or appropriate in a given context.)

8. Highlight the judging of the “impact” of performance - the effect, given the purpose - as opposed to over-rewarding merely the processes, the formats, or the content used; and/or the good-faith effort made.

[1] The word “rubric” derives from the Latin word for “red.” It was once used to signify the highlights of a legal decision as well as the directions for conducting religious services, found in the margins of liturgical books -- both written in red.