skip to main content
10.1145/3303772.3303829acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageslakConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Validating the Use of LMS-Derived Rubric Structural Features to Facilitate Automated Measurement of Rubric Quality

Published:04 March 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Rubrics are widely used throughout postsecondary education as means for aiding in instruction and evaluation. However, despite their broad global adoption, very little is known about the quality of rubrics in use. We develop two measures to assess the quality of rubrics: (1) a checklist identifying criteria of high-quality rubrics based on analytic rubric design best practices and (2) a set of LMS-derived features that are hypothesized to represent structural components that are, in general, necessary but not sufficient for high quality rubrics. The validity of using the feature-generated scores as proxies for identifying rubric quality is evaluated through several means. First, the feature-generated scores are calculated for a set of external exemplary rubrics of known high quality. Second, the feature-scores for a subset of internal rubrics are compared to average human rater scores of rubric quality based on the checklist. We discuss the results, practical applications, and a larger research program surrounding the feature-generated scores.

References

  1. Carnegie Mellon University. 2016. Creating and Using Rubrics. Retrieved from www.cmu.edu/teaching/assessment/assesslearning/rubrics.html/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Chinese University of Hong Kong. Policy on Assessment of Student Learning in Taught Programmes. Retrieved from www.cuhk.edu.hk/clear/qm/A5-1.pdf/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Flinders University. 2009. Using Rubrics in Assessment. Retrieved from www.flinders.edu.au/teaching/teaching-strategies/assessment/grading/using-rubrics.cfm/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. University of Manchester. 2018. Rubrics -- What Are They? Why and how should I use them? Retrieved from www.elearning.fse.manchester.ac.uk/rubrics-what-are-they-and-why-and-how-should-i-use-them/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. University of Waterloo. 2018. Rubrics: Useful Assessment Tools. Retrieved from https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/teaching-resources/teaching-tips/assessing-student-work/grading-and-feedback/rubrics-useful-assessment-tools/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Blackboard. 2018. Rubrics. Retrieved from https://help.blackboard.com/Learn/Instructor/Grade/Rubrics/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Desire2Learn. 2018. Rubrics. Retrieved from https://documentation.brightspace.com/EN/semester_start/-/instructor/faq_rubrics.htm/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Instructure. 2017. How do I Add a Rubric in a Course? Retrieved from https://community.canvaslms.com/docs/DOC-12722-415286227/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Moodle. 2018. Rubrics. Retrieved from https://docs.moodle.org/35/en/Rubrics/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Susan M. Brookhart. 2013. How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. W. James Popham. 2000. Modern educational measurement: Practical guidelines for educational leaders (3rd ed.). Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Anthony J. Nitko and Susan M. Brookhart. 2007. Educational Assessment of Students (5th ed.). Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Linda Suskie. 2009. Assessing student learning: A common sense guide (2nd ed). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Trudy W. Banta and Catherine A. Palomba, C. A. 2015. Assessment essentials: Planning, implementing, and improving assessment in higher education. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Heidi Goodrich Andrade. 2005. Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53, 1 (2005), 27-32.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Andrea Cockett and Carole Jackson. 2018. The use of assessment rubrics to enhance feedback in higher education: An integrated literature review. Nurse Education Today, 69 (2018), 8--13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Sebastian Barney, Mahvish Khurum, Kai Petersen, Michael Unterkalmsteiner, and Ronald Jabangwe. 2012. Improving students with rubric-based self-assessment and oral feedback. IEEE Transactions on Education, 55, 3 (2012), 319--325. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Susan M. Brookhart and Fei Chen. 2015. The quality and effectiveness of descriptive rubrics. Educational Review, 67, 3 (2015), 343--368.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Katherine P. Greenberg. 2015. Rubric use in formative assessment: A detailed behavioral rubric helps students improve their scientific writing skills. Teaching of Psychology, 42, 3 (2015), 211--217.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Doncho Petkov and Olga Petkova. 2006. Development of scoring rubrics for IS projects as an assessment tool. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 3 (2006), 499--510.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Rebecca J. Howell. 2014. Grading rubrics: hoopla or help? Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51, 4 (2014), 400--410.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Yu Huang and Min Gui. 2015. Articulating teachers' expectations afore: Impact of rubrics on Chinese EFL Learners' Sefl-Assessment and Speaking Ability. Journal of Educational and Training Studies, 3, 3 (2015), 126--132.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Y. Malini Reddy and Heidi Andrade. 2010. A Review of Rubric Use in Higher Education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 4 (2010), 435--448.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. C. A. Reitmeier, L. K. Svendsen, and D. A. Vrchota. 2004. Journal of Food Science Education, 3 (2004), 15--20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Mark P. J. van der Loo. 2014. The stringdist package for approximate string matching. The R Journal, 6 (2014), 111--122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Heidi Andrade and Ying Du. 2005. Student perspectives on rubric-referenced assessment. Practical Assessment, Research and Eval., 10, 3 (2005), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. AACU: American Association of College and Universities. 2017. VALUE rubric development project. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Jacob Cohen. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 10, 1 (1960), 37--46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Validating the Use of LMS-Derived Rubric Structural Features to Facilitate Automated Measurement of Rubric Quality

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        LAK19: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge
        March 2019
        565 pages
        ISBN:9781450362566
        DOI:10.1145/3303772

        Copyright © 2019 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 4 March 2019

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate236of782submissions,30%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader