Sample: A rating rubric for a case-writing assignment
[This sample rubric was constructed for a series of cases that teacher candidates wrote, based on their practice work in a school. It begins by offering advice about reading the rubric, and then goes on to identify several features of desirable cases and to distinguish performances on those features.]
Reading the rubric: Please notice that every selection I make in the rubric gives you two or three sentences of feedback. When I select a sentence from the rubric, I am reporting to you my judgment that the case more nearly resembles the sentence I chose than it resembles the adjacent sentences. That is, in my estimate it achieves more of value than is described by the sentence with the next lower score, and achieves less of value than is described by the sentence with the next higher score. By comparing the two or three sentences, you probably can understand more about my estimate than by looking only at the sentence I chose.
The case offers a balanced description of the activities observed.
2 Passable (not adequate). The description says far more about the teacher than about the students; or is vague, general, lacking in detail, or is obviously colored by interpretations, evaluations, proposals.
4 Adequate. The description includes both teacher and students. It does not obviously incorporate a favored interpretation, evaluation, or proposal. Therefore, it is available for interpretation.
6 Strong. The description includes teacher and students, presents their interaction concretely, and is itself free of interpretation, evaluation, or proposal. A strong base for interpretation.
8 Excellent. Beyond "strong," the description is very clear, specific, and vivid. It carefully avoids loaded terms and terms of interpretation and valuation, so aids dispassionate and insightful interpretation.
The case identifies the basic lesson craft in the activity
1 Passable.. The tables roughly identify the elements of activities
2 Adequate. The tables validly use the distinctions they call for.
3 Strong. The tables validly and precisely make the distinctions.
4 Excellent. Shows particular insight into some elements of the activity
The case offers searching interpretations of the activities described.
2 Passable (not adequate). The interpretation offers only one way of talking about the description. Or, the hypotheses offered are unclear, undeveloped, hard to follow.
4 Adequate. One hypothesis is favored; another also is offered. The favored hypothesis is relatively clear and explicitly connected to the facts of the case; the other less so.
6 Strong. Two or more clearly developed hypotheses are constructed and compared, so that the hypotheses taken together read as a thoughtful search for understanding of the situation described.
8 Excellent. The interpretation offers two or more well-developed hypotheses with great clarity, insight, and empathy with the persons who participated in the events described.
The case offers honest and generous assessments of the educational value of the activity described.
2 Passable (not adequate). Relates a value to one or more hypotheses from the interpretation, but vaguely, unclearly, with inadequate support.
4 Adequate. States an educational value, relates it to one or more hypotheses from the interpretation, and draws a conclusion that is plausible relative to the description.
6 Strong. Argues for an educational value, applies it specifically to one or more hypotheses from the interpretation, and relates a conclusion specifically to the facts of the case, balancing honesty and generosity.
8 Excellent. Like the "strong" instance, but with great clarity, explicit logic, and care for the participants to the case.
The case offers thoughtful deliberations on the relative merits of alternatives.
2 Passable (not adequate). One or more alternatives are offered, but they are vaguely presented and therefore difficult to assess.
4 Adequate. The section presents two alternatives to the situation described in the case, compares their potential results with what actually happened in the classroom, and draws a reasonable conclusion.
6 Strong. The assessment presents two clear and specific alternatives, compares their potential results with care for the circumstances and possibilities for error, and draws a persuasive conclusion.
8 Excellent. Strong, and offers alternatives with particular insight or ingenuity.
The case shows knowledge of options for thought and action in Elementary Classroom Management.
2 Passable (not adequate). Mentions but does not use options from ECM as parts of the interpretation, evaluation, or deliberation. Or, the assessment misapplies options from ECM.
4 Adequate. Makes several valid connections between the activity in the assessment and the options in ECM.
6 Strong. Shows consistent awareness of options from ECM, and validly applies some of those options in interpretations, evaluations, and deliberation.
8 Excellent. Strong, and employs options from ECM with particular insight or ingenuity.
The case makes consistent use of the conventions of standard English
2 Passable (not adequate). The writing in the assessment is unclear, disorderly, and contains obvious errors that could have been caught in proofreading.
4 Adequate. The writing in the assessment is clear, orderly, and relatively free of obvious errors that could have been caught in proofreading.
6 Strong. the writing in the assessment is clear, specific, graceful, expressive, and largely free of errors, even of the small sort.
8 Excellent. Strong, and achieves high clarity, imagery, persuasiveness, etc.
RATINGS CONVERTED TO GRADES |
||
Total rating |
Grade |
Meaning, basis |
45-52 |
4.0 |
Excellent |
39-44 |
3.5 |
(all "strong" or better) |
32-38 |
3.0 |
Strong |
26-31 |
2.5 |
(all "adequate" or better) |
18-25 |
2.0 |
Adequate |