Você está na página 1de 23

Republic of the Philippines

MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY


COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Fatima, General Santos City
Module 4: SCORING RUBRICS & PORTFOLIO
ASSESSMENTS
LESSON 12. Meaning, Types &
Development of
Rubrics

Presented by: Angely Joy C.


Arabis

OBJECTIVES:

Identify the advantages and


disadvantages of analytic and
holistic
rubrics

Discuss the steps in


developing rubrics

Explain how scoring rubrics


can be
developed

ANALYTIC
RUBRIC DISADVANTAGES
ADVANTAGES

Provides useful
feedback on areas of

Takes more time to


strength and
create and use than
weaknesses
holistic rubric

Gives diagnostic

Unless each point


information to teacher
for each criterion is well
Promotes
defined, instructors may
consistent scoring
across students and
not arrive at the same
between raters
score

Good for formative


assessment; adaptable
for
summative
Source:
Susan M. Brookhart and Anthony J. Nitko, 2008, Assessment
assessment
and
Grading in Classrooms (p. 201) retrieved from
http://manoa.hawaii.edu/assessment/howto/rubrics.htm

HOLISTIC RUBRIC
ADVANTAGES
DISADVANTAGES

Provides an
overview of student

Does not provide


achievement
specific feedback for

Puts emphasis on
improvement
what the learner is able

Does not give


to demonstrate rather
diagnostic information
than what he/she
to the teacher
cannot do

Saves time by
minimizing the number
of decisions the grader
has to make

Efficient for large


Source: Susan M. Brookhart and Anthony J. Nitko, 2008, Assessment
group
scoring
and Grading
in Classrooms (p. 201) retrieved from
http://manoa.hawaii.edu/assessment/howto/rubrics.htm

Group Participation
Rubric
(sample analytic rubric)

Distinguished
Criteria
Workload
Did a full share of
the workor more;
knows what needs
to be done and
does it; volunteers
to help others.
Getting Organized Took the initiative
proposing meeting
times and getting
group organized.
Participation in
Provided many
Discussions
good ideas for the
unit development;
inspired others;
clearly
communicated
desires, ideas,
personal needs, and
feelings.
Meeting Deadlines Completed assigned
work ahead of time.

Showing up for
Meetings Score

Level of Participation
Proficient
Basic
Did an equal share Did almost as much
of the work; does
work as others;
work when asked;
seldom asks for
works hard most of help.
the time.
Worked agreeably
with partner(s)
concerning times
and places to meet.
Participated in
discussions; shared
feelings and
thoughts.

Could be coaxed
into meeting with
other partner(s).

Unacceptable
Did less work than
others; doesnt get
caught up after
absence; doesnt
ask for help.
Did not meet
partner(s) at agreed
times and places.

Listened mainly; on Seemed bored with


some occasions,
conversations about
made suggestions. the unit; rarely
spoke up, and ideas
were off the mark.

Completed assigned Needed some


work on time.
reminding; work
was late but it
didnt impact grade.

Needed much
reminding; work
was late and it did
impact quality of
work or grade.
Showed up late, but No show or
it wasnt a big
extremely late;
problem for
feeble or no excuse
completing work.
offered.

Showed up for
Showed up for
meetings
meetings on time.
punctually,
sometimes ahead of
time.
Providing
Habitually provides Gave feedback that Provided some
Was openly rude
Feedback
Score the
dignified,
and of
did
not offend. in Authentic
feedback;
giving
Source: Making
Grade: clear,
The Role
Assessment
Learning by when
Marilyn
M.
respectful
feedback.
sometimes
hurt
feedback.
Lombardi, retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3019.pdf

General Education
Scoring Guide for Critical
Thinking
California State
University, Fresno
(sample analytic rubric)

Scoring Level

Analysis & Evaluation

Examines conclusions

Interpretation
Analyzes insightful
questions
Refutes bias

Critiques content

Examines inconsistencies
Values information

Asks insightful questions


Detects bias.
Categorizes content.

4 - Accomplished

Uses reasonable

judgment
Discriminates rationally

Synthesizes data
Views information
critically
Formulates conclusions
Recognizes arguments
Notices differences

Identifies inconsistencies
Recognizes context

Evaluates data
Seeks out information

Identifies some questions

Notes some bias


Recognizes basic content

States some
inconsistencies
Selects sources
adequately
Fails to question data

Identifies some
conclusions
Sees some arguments
Identifies some
differences
Paraphrases data

Ignores bias

Misses major content


areas
Detects no inconsistencies

Chooses biased sources

1 - Beginning

Discusses issues
thoroughly
Shows intellectual
honesty
Justifies decisions
Assimilates information

Argues clearly
Identifies issues
Attributes sources
naturally
Suggests solutions
Incorporates
information
Misconstructs
arguments
Generalizes issues
Cites sources

Presents few options

Assumes information
valid
Fails to draw
conclusions
Sees no arguments
Overlooks differences

Overlooks some
information
Omits argument

Misrepresents issues
Excludes data

Repeats data

Omits research

Draws faulty
conclusions
Shows intellectual
dishonesty

3 - Competent

2 - Developing

Presentation
Argues succinctly

Source: CSU Fresno, Downloaded 3/2/05 from


http://www.csufresno.edu/cetl/assessment/CTScoring.doc

Levels of Participation
(sample holistic rubric)

Level 1 Participation
(Beginner)

Little or no advance preparation


Lets others set and pursue the agenda
Observes passively and says little or nothing
Responds to questions
Gives the impression of wanting to be somewhere else
Attendance record is haphazard and inconsistent; may
be absent or late without notice
Level 2 Participation
Moderately prepared in advance
(Novice)
Takes some part in setting group goals and agendas
Participates in discussions, letting others provide the
direction
Occasionally introduces information or asks questions
If likely to be absent or late, informs others ahead of
time and arranges to cover own responsibilities
Level 3 Participation
Well prepared in advance
(Proficient)
Takes a large part in setting group goals and agendas
Actively participates in discussion and asks questions
Listens actively and shows understanding by
paraphrasing or by acknowledging and building on
others ideas
Volunteers willingly and carries own share of the groups
responsibilities
Level 4 Participation
All of the markers of proficient participation, plus:
(Advanced)
Draws out ideas or concerns of others, especially those
who have said little
Re-visits issues or ideas that need more attention
Helps the group stay on track
Summarizes group decisions and action assignments
Source: Adapted from Bowling Green University retrieved from
http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/provost/Assessment/Particip.htm

Steps
in
Developing
1. Identify
your
standards,
Rubrics
objectives
and goals for
your students.
Standard is a statement
of what the students should
be able to know or be able
to
perform.
It
should
indicate that your students
should
meet
these
standards.

Source: Concepcion, Benjamin Jr. et al. (2012). Licensure Examination for Teachers
Reviewer, 2012 Edition. Sampaloc, Manila: MET Review Publishing House.

2. Identify the characteristics


of a good performance on that
task,
the
criteria.
When the students perform
or present their work, it should
indicate that they performed
well in the task given to them;
hence
they
meet
that
particular
standards.

Source: Concepcion, Benjamin Jr. et al. (2012). Licensure Examination for Teachers
Reviewer, 2012 Edition. Sampaloc, Manila: MET Review Publishing House.

3. Identify the levels of


performance for each criterion.
In this case, the rater can
sufficiently discriminate the
performance of the students in
each criteria providing them
more detailed feedback about
their
performance.

Source: Concepcion, Benjamin Jr. et al. (2012). Licensure Examination for Teachers
Reviewer, 2012 Edition. Sampaloc, Manila: MET Review Publishing House.

Developing Scoring
Rubrics

A
step-by-step
process
for
designing scoring rubrics for classroom
use is presented on the next slide.
Information for these procedures was
compiled
from
various
sources
(Airasian, 2000 & 2001; Mertler, 2001;
Montgomery, 2001; Nitko, 2001;
Tombari
&
Borich,
1999).
Source: Gabuyo, Yonardo A. Assessment of Learning 1: Textbook and
Reviewer

1. Reexamine the learning


objectives to be addressed by the
task.
2. Identify specific observable
attributes that you want to see (as
well as those you dont want to
see) your students demonstrate in
their product, process, or
performance.
3. Brainstorm characteristics that

Source: Gabuyo, Yonardo A. Assessment of Learning 1: Textbook and


Reviewer

3a.
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.
3b: For analytic rubrics, write thorough
narrative descriptions for excellent work
and poor work for each individual
attribute. Describe the highest and lowest
Source: Gabuyo,
Yonardo A. Assessment
of Learning
1: Textbook and
levels
of performance
using
the
Reviewer

3c: For holistic rubrics, complete the


rubric by describing other levels on the
continuum that ranges from excellent to
poor work for the collective attributes.
Write descriptions for all intermediate
levels of performance.
3d: 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
Source: Gabuyo, Yonardo A. Assessment of Learning 1: Textbook and
performance
for each attribute
Reviewer

4. Collect samples of student


work that exemplify each level.
5. Revise the rubric, as
necessary.

Source: Gabuyo, Yonardo A. Assessment of Learning 1: Textbook and


Reviewer

Types of Scoring Instruments for


Performance
Assessments
Scoring Instruments
for
Performance
Assessments

Checklis
ts

Rating
Scales
Rubrics

Analytic
Rubrics

Holistic
Rubrics

Source: Gabuyo, Yonardo A. Assessment of Learning 1: Textbook and


Reviewer

References
Books
Brookhart, Susan M. and Nitko Anthony J.
2008 Assessment and Grading in Classrooms
(p. 201),Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education. Copyright 2008 by Pearson
Education.
Concepcion, Benjamin Jr. et al. (2012).
Licensure Examination for Teachers
Reviewer, 2012 Edition. Sampaloc, Manila:
MET Review Publishing House.

Online
CSU Fresno, Downloaded 3/2/05 from
http://www.csufresno.edu/cetl/assessment/CT
Scoring.doc
Creating and Using Rubrics.(2011)
University of Hawaii, Manoa. Retrieved from
http://manoa.hawaii.edu/assessment/howto/r
ubrics.htm
Lombardi, Marilyn M. Retrieved February
12, 2008 from Making the Grade: The Role of
Assessment in Authentic Learning retrieved
from

Thank you and God


Bless !