MARKING AND GIVING FEEDBACK

Introduction to marking
Using rubrics to mark accurately and reliably
Estimated duration: 60 minutes

Carry out some further research on rubrics and gather some inspiration by looking at the following:
 The examples below showing rubrics of different types.
 Brown, G, Bull, J, & Pendlebury, M. (1997) Assessing student learning in higher education. New York:
Routledge.
 Walvoord, B. & Anderson, V. (1999) Effective Grading Practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Examples of rubrics

Contents

Introduction..............................................................................................2
Example 1: Rubric for a short answer text question...............................................3
Example 2: Rubric for scoring writing (1)............................................................4
Example 3: Rubric for scoring writing (2)............................................................6
Example 4: Rubric for scoring student presentations (1)..........................................7
Example 5: Rubric for scoring student presentations (2)..........................................9
Example 6: Rubric for scoring an exam question .................................................10
Example 7: Rubric for first component of proposal paper.......................................13
Example 8: Rubric for quizzes and homework.....................................................14
Example 9: Rubric for evaluating senior design project..........................................15
Example 10: Rubric for problem-based learning discussion lab.................................17
Example 11: Using rubrics to help students develop their own
ability to assess their work.......................................................................18

1
Introduction
The examples of rubrics given in this document demonstrate how varied they can be. For example, levels of
performance can be expressed in a range of ways…

 They might be laid out on a scale with the points along the scale given descriptive words, like this:
0 1 2 3
Unacceptable Minimally acceptable Acceptable Exceeds expectations

 They might be more elaborate and informative, like this:

Unacceptable Minimally acceptable Acceptable Exceeds expectations

The answer has several The answer contains The answer The answer not only
errors in both conceptual one or two basic facts contains most contains the main points
level and communication that are correct, but (75%) of the points but goes beyond them
clarity. Multiple may also have incorrect that needed to be to provide a critique of
mechanical errors or statements as well. No included. The their veracity. The
complete failure to connections or writing is clear, if writing is clear and
answer the question comparisons provided. uninspired. Correct measured.
attempts to
integrate the
points.

Rubrics frequently indicate the point value or level in addition to or in place of the scale shown above, like this:

Component Possible point value

All main ideas are included 5 points total
Ideas have been analyzed 5 points total
Ideas have been connected 3 points
Writing is clear and coherent 3 points

As you read through the examples, make a note of elements that you consider particularly effective or relevant
to your own situation.

Reflective questions
You may also wish to reflect upon the following questions as you read each rubric:
 How much room does the rubric leave for individual interpretation or subjectivity in marking? Can you see
any ways of making it more specific?
 Imagine using each rubric. Are there any areas you feel would require further clarification before you were
able to make a start? Is it clear how you are to decide between each level of attainment?
 What is an appropriate level of detail for a rubric? Some academics have argued that, while it is helpful to
be as minutely specific as possible, there is also value in taking a step back and marking more holistically,
and that the final grade should reflect a balance between these two approaches. Do you agree? Why (not)?
And where on the spectrum of minutiae/holistic does each rubric stand?

Our thanks to all those who volunteered examples from their own courses.

2
Example 1:
Rubric for a short answer test question

Source: Marilla Svinicki, University of Texas at Austin College of Education

Introduction
This rubric might be used for scoring a written essay exam question. Note that there is space for the grader to
keep track of unanticipated responses and how they were scored so that all papers will be consistent any time
the unanticipated answer is encountered.

Question
Explain in 100 words or less how you would apply the theory of vicarious reinforcement to exercise more
control over students in an elementary level class. (10 points)

Rubric
Criteria Points
Accurate description of vicarious reinforcement as a 3
concept
Accurate use for classroom management suggested 5
Complete, well-structured answer less than 100 words 2
If incorrect terminology used, subtract -3 if frequent, -2 if occasional

Notes to grader

Frequent misconceptions used (and disposition of each instance)

Frequently used incorrect terminology (and disposition of each instance)

3
Example 2:
Rubric for scoring writing (1)

Source: Sally Kuhlenschmidt, Western Kentucky University

Introduction
This more detailed rubric is designed for assessing writing assignments.

CATEGORY Most points Zero points

Clarity Grammar, spelling, Occasional (2 or 3 per Problems in grammar, Significant

and style make it easy page) grammar, spelling spelling or style that interfere problems in
for the reader to or style problems. with the author's statements. grammar, spelling
follow. Uses words Tendency to use vague (Multiple problems in each or style that make
correctly and avoids words or excessive paragraph). it challenging to
jargon unless it is the jargon. follow the author's
most precise word. statements.
Accuracy All statements are All statements are No more than one minor More than one
accurate relative to accurate relative to the inaccuracy per page. inaccuracy per
the resource being resource being examined page.
examined and/or to and/or to the material in
the material in the the textbook.
textbook. Discrepancies are missed.
Discrepancies
between sources are
indicated.
Precision/ Statements are at the Most statements are at Statements are sometimes Fails to provide a
Logic best level of the best level of on target and sometimes off level of
information that information that answers center. Segments of the information that
answers the question-- the question--not too paper hang together but answers the
not too vague but not vague but not "lost in the other parts are unclear or question--either
"lost in the details" details" and missing the contradictory with no good too vague or filled
and missing the big big picture. Statements resolution. with trivial details.
picture. Statements are usually mutually Statements are
are mutually supporting and follow internally
supporting and follow from one another. Any contradictory
from one another. Any contradictions are without
contradictions are explained. explanation.
explained.
Relevance/ Achieves the learning Achieves the learning Achieves learning objectives Fails to achieve
Significance objectives of the task. objectives of the task. minimally. Topic choice is the learning
Topic is significant to Topic is obviously central only vaguely related to the objectives of the
both the course and in to the course. assignment. task. The topic is
larger senses (e.g., to trivial or irrelevant
individual, to the to assignment.
region). Makes a case

4
 for that significance.

Depth/Breadth Response displays a Of the following 2 tasks, Of the following 2 tasks, Response is both
full understanding of does one well and the does one well and the other narrower than
the complexity of the other partially or does not at all or does both appropriate and
issue addressed and both partially minimally superficial. Fails to
multiple points of a) Recognizing varied a) Recognizing varied points recognize varied
view. Recognizes points of view of view interpretations
varied interpretations b) Exploring the topic in b) Exploring the topic in and implications
and implications. depth from one point of depth from one point of of topic.
view. view.
No Plagiarism Rephrases in most Quotes properly but Plagiarized. Used
cases. Uses only excessive use of quotations. more than 3
occasional quotation consecutive words
that is in quotation from a source
marks and is correctly without quotation
cited following APA marks.
style.

5
Example 3:
Rubric for scoring writing (2)

Source: Michael Theall, Youngstown State University, USA

Introduction
This is a generic rubric that can be used for holistic grading of any general writing assignment.

Rubric

Holistic: Overall, does the essay hold together as a piece of college-level writing?
DESCRIPTORS/SCORES: ACCEPTABLE
4. The essay shows adequate structure, support for major points, and command of the language
5. and may show quite good structure, support for all points, and good command of the language
6. and shows some insight, creativity, and very good command of the language.
DESCRIPTORS/SCORES: UNACCEPTABLE
3. The essay may wander a bit, fail to support points adequately, or may show unacceptable command
of some sentence-level features
2. and may show weakness in several of the areas, or serious weakness in one or more areas
1. and may show seriously flawed writing in most areas.

Focus: Does the writer follow directions and address the topic adequately?
DESCRIPTORS/SCORES: ACCEPTABLE
4. Follows directions, addresses the topic, and lets the reader know what's coming
5. and shows some insight into the topic
6. and even shows some creativity.
DESCRIPTORS/SCORES: UNACCEPTABLE
3. Drops a minor part of the directions or misses a point or stance central to the topic
2. and loses touch with the topic at times
1. and may not follow directions or may lose touch with the topic entirely.

Validity: Does the writer use accurate, non-trivial evidence and logic as support?
DESCRIPTORS/SCORES: ACCEPTABLE
4. The evidence is reasonably accurate and non-trivial
5. and may show an above-average range of knowledge of the topic

6
Example 4:
Rubric for scoring student presentations (1)

Source: Norback & Utschig Presentation Scoring System, University of Georgia

Introduction
This is part of a much larger rubric for evaluating student presentations. The complete rubric has four
components:

 Customizing to the audience (shown below)

 Telling the story
 Displaying key information
 Delivering the presentation.

Each component is described in much greater detail in the final full rubric. Some examples of behavioral
descriptions of a ‘wow’ performance are shown below.

Rubric: Customizing to the audience

Audience member characteristics are identified ahead of the presentation as observed through presentation
details tailored to audience needs and interests."

No Not Yes, Yes Wow!

much but
Connects with the audience, referring directly to their needs 1 2 3 4 5
Uses appropriate language for audience, describing concepts 1 2 3 4 5
at just the right level
Provides relevant details familiar to audience, using concrete 1 2 3 4 5
examples where relevant
Takes questions adeptly and answers them satisfactorily 1 2 3 4 5

Examples of behavioral descriptors of a "wow!" level of performance.

 "Greets audience and uses names of audience members if possible."

 "Demonstrates that audience questions have been anticipated."
 "Describes how skills/knowledge/experience was important in the work behind each key point."

7
Example 5:
Rubric for scoring student presentations (2)

Source: Marilla Svinicki, University of Texas at Austin College of Education, USA

Introduction
This rubric was developed for scoring a presentation made by graduate students in a course about applying
educational theories to special populations.

Rubric
Circle the level for each component and add weighted scores

I. Clear description of population characteristics and challenges (40% weight)

0 Not satisfactory Incorrect, unclear or incomplete description
1
2 Satisfactory Complete, correct and clearly presented for both
3
4 Very well done Complete, correct and clearly presented, but shows an appreciation of connections
between population and challenges; OR goes beyond clear description to very
sophistication presentation or connection

II. Reasonable choice and description of theories that would be useful and why others are not useful (40%
weight)
0 Not satisfactory Incorrect, unclear or incomplete choice, analysis, and/or description of theories in
relation to topic
1
2 Satisfactory Correct theories chosen and tied to population being analyzed; standard analysis of
usefulness
3
4 Very well done Meets all standards of satisfactory, but raises the analysis and comparison of theories
to professional level of sophistication

III. Professional and Engaging (20% weight)

0 Not satisfactory Not satisfactory Presentation too casual or too disconnected with poor support
materials and visuals. Doesn't follow directions
1
2 Satisfactory Presentation smooth and relaxed with adequate visuals and support materials
3
4 Very well done Presentation has an extra degree of variety and creativity while still making the main
points clearly and professionally

8
Example 6:
Rubric for scoring an exam question

Source: Michael Theall, Youngstown State University

Question
1. In your work as a teacher who is a “reflective practitioner”, you must constantly make decisions. Some of
these decisions allow you the time to investigate topics and make plans (as in designing a new course for a
future offering), and some allow no time at all (as in the need for you to act immediately when a classroom
situation arises). Please describe the foundations or principles upon which you make these decisions.
OR
2. In your classroom, you face students whose preparation, abilities, skills, motivations, individual differences,
and personal situations vary a great deal. Some are eager and able. Some are resistant and unskilled.
Some have potential that is masked or limited by factors beyond their (and perhaps your) control. You have to
teach them all. What do you do to try to succeed in this most challenging task?

For either question …

You can respond in several ways, but your response should touch on one or more of the following questions
(and/or other points/issues you feel to be important):
 What factors do you consider and what issues do you take into account?
 What kinds of information are important?
 What are your beliefs and motivations?
 When you have time, what process do you use to design effective instruction?
 When you must respond immediately, what guides your thinking and actions?
 What resources do you call upon?
 What human/interpersonal issues come into play?
 What theories and “best practices” do you rely on?

Complete answers to these question and sub-questions would fill a book. Do not try to put down everything you
know. Rather, indicate the important things that guide and influence your decisions. If you had ‘the’ answers, you
would become famous … but teaching and learning present unique situations and the most successful teachers
know there is no, one answer. They understand that they must reflect on a variety of issues and adapt to the
variety of students and situations they face. Reflect for us here. Tell us what do you do and why do you do it?

Rubric follows on the next page.

9
 RATINGS SCORE
SKILLS
SUPERIOR = 4 STRONG = 3 ACCEPTABLE = 2 MARGINAL = 1 ABSENT
=0
Consider Thorough Most factors Some factors Many factors Absent = 0 3
important outline of covered covered omitted
factors in important =3 =2 =1
successful factors
instruction =4

Incorporate Strong beliefs: Strong beliefs Some beliefs Little Absent = 0 3

philosophy clear & relevant discussed presented philosophy or
of teaching & to =3 =2 few beliefs
beliefs tchng & lrng included
about teaching =4 =1
& learning

Demonstrate ID process or Brief process or ID model(s) or ID model(s) or Absent = 0 2

knowledge of model(s) model process process
basic discussed description mentioned implied
instructional in some depth =3 =2 =1
design =4

Show concern Clear, learner- Some discussion of Reference(s) to Learner- Absent = 0 4

for centered l-c approach l-c approach centeredness
students & approach =3 =2 implied
learning =4 =1

Demonstrate Shows good Discusses reflective Mentions Reflective Absent = 0 3

reflective understanding practice reflective practive
practice in of =3 practice implied
action reflective =2 =1
practice
=4

Connect to Strong Some connections Few Theory & Absent = 0 2

"best connections to to connections to practice
practices" & theory & theory & practice theory & links implied
theories practice =3 practice =1
=4 =2
Points
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
Writing
deductions

10
 >>>>>>
SCORING***** PASS = > 12 pts. FAIL = < 13 pts. Total points
* >>>>>>>>>>>>
RATER: M. STUDENT GRADE Pass
Theall >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>

11
Example 7:
Rubric for first component of proposal paper

Source: Marilla Svinicki, University of Texas at Austin College of Education

Note
This rubric was used for scoring an initial paper in a graduate class.

Purpose
To create an understanding of the problem and the need for a solution that is instruction-based or behavior
management based.
Questions

1. What is the problem for which you are proposing a solution?

2. Why is it important?

3. Why is an instructional or behavioral management solution called for?

Rubric
Basics The paper must state the problem so that someone not in the area can understand what the
target problem looks like from a behavioral, learning, instructional or management standpoint (2
pages). It also makes a case for why this problem needs to be solved, including what impact it is
having on the individual or class of individuals who represent the target audience (2 pages).
Finally it relates the problem to the purpose of this class: the use of psychological theories to
design instruction to address the issue (1 page). I recommend providing headings to indicate the
subcomponents of the paper.
An ‘A’ paper For this to be an A paper, the above must be very clearly and concisely written, with convincing
main arguments, and give the reader a clear sense of how solving this problem will benefit the
target audience. The paper must build a strong tie between the problem and basing the solution
on instructional or management theory or theories studied in this class. (For the last of these
criteria, you may look ahead to theories we have not discussed if they are appropriate.)
A ‘B’ paper For this to be a B paper, at least two of the three basics listed above must be included, but the
writing or argumentation will be less clear, concise, or compelling than an A paper. There will be
fewer examples of key evidence for the seriousness of this problem and fewer reasons why the
problem needs to be resolved using an instructional or management solution. References to the
theory or theories that make up this course may be fewer.
A ‘C’ paper A paper will receive a C if it is not clear what the problem being addressed is or if only one of the
three basics listed above is included. A C might also reflect a poorly written paper or one with a
lot of mistakes, either conceptual or mechanical.

12
Example 8:
Rubric for quizzes and homework in Environmental Science
Source: Diane Ebert-May and Tsao, Michigan State University
Note
This rubric can be used with either homework problems or on short quizzes.
Rubric
Level of Achievement General Approach
Exemplary • Addresses the question.
• States a relevant, justifiable answer.
• Presents arguments in a logical
order.
• Uses acceptable style and grammar
(no errors).
Adequate • Does not address the question
explicitly, although does so
tangentially.
• States a relevant and justifiable
answer.
• Presents arguments in a logical
order.
• Uses acceptable style and grammar
(one error).
Needs Improvement • Does not address the question.
• States no relevant answers
• Indicates misconceptions.
• Is not clearly or logically organized.
 Fails to use acceptable style and
grammar (two or more errors).
No Answer
Comprehension
• Demonstrates an accurate and
complete understanding of the
question.
• Backs conclusions with data and
warrants.
 Uses 2 or more ideas, examples and/or
arguments that support the answer.
• Demonstrates accurate but only
adequate understanding of question
because does not back conclusions
with warrants and data.
• Uses only one idea to support the
answer.
 Less thorough than above.
• Does not demonstrate accurate
understanding of the question.
 Does not provide evidence to support
their answer to the question.
13
Example 9:
Rubric for evaluating senior design projects in Chemical
Engineering

Source: Ron Miller, Colorado School of Mines

Introduction
This rubric is used to evaluate very extensive complex projects that require students to produce original
designs for senior level courses intended as capstone courses. Note that the rubric also relates each
objective being evaluated in the left most column.

Outcome 4 - Exemplary 3 - Proficient 2 - Apprentice 1 - Novice Score

ChE graduates
will be able to
design chemical
engineering
processes or
systems which
meet specified
requirements by:
a. identifying All important Important Most objectives Most or all
specific project project objectives objectives are are identified but important
objectives based are identified identified but 1 or at least 1 or 2 objectives are not
on general 2 minor ones are important ones identified.
project and client missing. are missing.
requirements
b. gathering and All relevant Sufficient Some information No significant
using relevant information is information is is obtained, but background
background obtained and obtained and more is needed to information is
information used to support used to support support design. gathered.
design. design.
c. generating and Three or more At least 3 At least 2 Only one solution
analyzing alternative alternative alternative is recommended;
alternative solutions are solutions are solutions are analysis does not
solutions by considered; each considered; considered; apply all relevant
synthesizing and is correctly analysis is analysis contains chemical
applying analyzed for complete but minor conceptual engineering
appropriate technical contains minor and/or procedural knowledge.
chemical feasibility. procedural errors. errors.
engineering
knowledge
d. choosing the Best solution is Reasonable Satisfactory Only solution
optimal solution recommended solution is solution is considered; no
based on based on stated recommended; recommended; optimization
evaluation of criteria. other alternatives better solutions included; better
technical and should have been were available to solutions were

14
economic criteria developed be considered. avaialble.
ChE graduates Economic analysis Economic analysis Economic analysis Economic analysis
will be able to is complete and omits 1 or 2 omits 1 or more contains major
analyze the correct; all minor economic major economic computational
economic relevant factors but factors, but errors and/or
profitability of economic factors computations are computations are omits more than
chemical are considered. correct. correct. 1 major economic
engineering factor.
projects or
systems
ChE graduates Written report is Written report Written report is Written report
will demonstrate virtually error- presents design generally well does not present
an ability to free, logically recommendations written but design
communicate presents design and analysis contains some recommendations
effectively in recommendations logically, s well grammatical, or analyses
writing. and analysis, is organized and rhetorical and/or clearly, is poorly
well-organized easy to read, organizational organized and/or
and easy to read contains high errors; design contains major
and contains high quality graphics recommendations grammatical
quality graphics. and contains few and analysis are and/or rhetorical
minor mentioned but errors.
grammatical or not fully
rhetorical errors. discussed.

15
Example 10:
Rubric for problem-based learning discussion lab

Source: Source: Dr. Patrick Davis, University of Texas at Austin College of Pharmacy, USA

Introduction
This rubric is used to evaluate student participation in a problem-based learning discussion laboratory
session on a Pharmacotherapeutics course.

Facilitator: Case #:

Lab Day (circle one): M T W Th F Date:

These are possible concepts that may fall under these

categories. Please use them globally, not as a checklist.
Preparation & Clinical Skills (6 points)
 prepared and reviewed multiple resources
 appeared able to answer questions without
hesitation
 defined terms and clarified concepts ahead of
time
 volunteered meaningful answers throughout
session
 asked relevant questions throughout session
 used appropriate vocabulary/pronunciation
Group Skills & Communication Skills (6 points)
 encouraged others to contribute
 shared ideas with others
 exhibited tolerance and respect for others
 was assertive, confident (without dominating)
 was clear and concise
 analyzed contributions of others
Administration (3 points)
 dressed appropriately for lab as per syllabus
 was professional and enthusiastic
 was punctual
Total Score (15 points possible):

Please use the space below to write any comments (positive or negative) about individual students:

16
Example 11:
Using rubrics to help students develop their own ability to evaluate
their work

Source: John Cowan, Napier University

Introduction
The following example shows rubrics can be used to help students learn how to make evaluative
judgements of their own work. Shown below is one example of a class activity he uses in this manner.

Matching performance to evaluative criteria

Purpose: To engage each student in objectively and formatively evaluating their own performance against
familiar criteria, which have previously been applied to similar work, but in that case by a grader or tutor.

Outline
a. This activity is based on a current task. It has been used, for example, in conjunction with a
discursive essay in social sciences, a first year engineering design; and a reflective journal featuring
a recent critical incident on a placement.
b. On completion of the task, students are immediately offered a podcast guiding them through the
process of evaluating their work, leading to an accumulation of suggestions for both encouraging
and critical comments, as feedforward.
c. Students should now assemble and summarise the elements in their self-judgement, the data on
which it was based, and their evaluative judgements.
d. Marking tutors, acting virtually as auditors at this stage, quickly check the evaluations, and return
(without judgements) with comments only when the judgement has overlooked something
significant, or appears unjustifiably generous – or harsh.
e. Assessment, in the form of a mark or grade, is not declared or (preferably) negotiated (as per Taras,
2001), until all of the above steps have been completed.
f. The tutor informs the student of the outcome of their auditing of the student’s self-judgement.

The common outcome is that each student will have had a relevant and useful experience of identifying
personally-related data, and matching it to multiple criteria, in an objective process. The impact on the
students’ further development is strengthened by the immediacy of the details of feedback and
feedforward, and the lack of emphasis on the mark or grade to be awarded.

17