Elements of rubrics

Effective rubrics are built upon four fundamental elements: task description, criteria, performance levels, and descriptors. After writing the task description and selecting the rubric type, follow the principles below when designing the three elements of a rubric.

1Criteria

2Levels of performance

3Descriptors

Criteria

Consider: What characteristics of student work provide evidence for student learning of the knowledge or skills specified in the learning outcome?

The criteria:

should be aligned with learning outcomes and reflected in task description

For example, suppose that the aligned learning outcome (opens in a new window) for a written evaluation task is “Evaluate psychological research according to scientific method guidelines.” Consider what the key characteristics for an evaluation at a Proficient or Exemplary level are.

In this example, some skilled-based criteria including “Critical thinking”, “Accuracy”, or “Communication” could be used.

could be task-based or skilled-based

should not contain reference to the work quality

are recommended to be within three to six (only applicable to analytic rubrics; Wolf & Stevens, 2007)

could be weighted (only applicable to analytic rubrics)

Levels of performance

It is recommended to use the following grading scale from the ANU Student assessment (coursework) policy (opens in new window) as performance levels, if there are no specific accreditation or discipline requirements. The actual numerical grade calculation may vary depending on the context of your college and school within your discipline.

	Grades
	High Distinction (HD)	Distinction (D)	Credit (C)	Pass (P)	Fail (N)
Numerical Mark (%)	80 – 100	70 – 79	60 – 69	50 – 59	0 – 49
Standards	Work of exceptional quality, as demonstrated in the attainment of learning outcomes at or above the relevant qualification level	Work of superior quality, as demonstrated in the attainment of learning outcomes at or above the relevant qualification level	Work of good quality, as demonstrated in the attainment of learning outcomes at or above the relevant qualification level	Work of satisfactory quality, as demonstrated in the attainment of learning outcomes at or above the relevant qualification level	Work in which the attainment of learning outcomes at or above the relevant qualification level has not been demonstrated

Recommended grading scale from the ANU Student assessment (coursework) policy

Please note: this grading scale is derived from the ANU grading system outlined in the policy. It is not intended to serve as a rubric descriptor. The provided Standards represent generic ANU grade descriptors, and it should align with the performance levels in our rubric.

Advantages of the ANU grading system

Adopting this grading scale as the performance levels implies that students’ work will be evaluated on a five-point scale (HD, D, C, P, N). This approach presents several advantages:

Firstly, it is familiar to ANU students, minimising confusion.
Secondly, it streamlines the marking process and facilitates conversion into numerical scores for reporting purposes.
For smaller or lower-weighted assessment tasks, such as 10-15%, using grade ranges (HD-D, C-P, N) can simplify the grading process.

Other performance levels

In addition to ANU grades, other performance levels in a taxonomy (opens in new window) can also be used, such as these:

Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy
Biggs and Collis’ SOLO Taxonomy
the adapted levels in TEQSA’s Assessment Rubric Guide (Developing, Functional, Proficient, Advanced)

However, this requires additional steps to assign a range of marks to performance levels and align with the ANU grading scale later for reporting purposes.

For instance, if an assessment total score is 100, then ‘Advanced’ is equivalent to 85+; ‘Proficient’ is between 70-84 points; ‘Functional’ is 51-69 and ‘Developing’ is 0-50.

Grades can be awarded based on performance levels and later converted to the ANU grading scale (HD, D, C, P, N). Students should be communicated clearly about the levels prior to the assessment task.

Descriptors

After deciding on the number of performance levels, start writing descriptors for each level and criterion. Start by writing the level intended for most students to reach (i.e., Credit), then adjust it accordingly. Another way is to start with the top level (i.e., High Distinction), then work backwards.

Consider: What does student work look like at each level of quality, from high to low, on this criterion?

The descriptors should be (Brookhart, 2013, p.28):

Descriptive

Parallel

Clear

Written as a continuum

Distinguished among levels

This word bank resource (also available in additional resources) was developed by Cordiner (2010) and provides useful phrases and language to write rubric descriptors. Section 7 is particularly helpful in providing examples of how to avoid ambiguous and vague language in our rubrics.

References

Brookhart, S. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD.

Cordiner, M. (2010). Word banks for use in writing criteria sheets. University of Tasmania. https://www.teaching-learning.utas.edu.au/__data/assets/word_doc/0012/51303/word-banks-handout-.doc

Wolf, K., & Stevens, E. (2007). The role of rubrics in advancing and assessing student learning. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 7(1), 3-14. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1055646.pdf

In this collection