Co-constructing a rubric checklist with first year university students

Abstract

This paper reports on a study in which students co-constructed a rubric checklist with their lecturer and which they used to assess themselves. Data were collected by means of a student questionnaire, tutor feedback, as well as tutors' and lecturers' observations to ascertain students' experiences and opinions of the design process and of using the tool to self-assess. The findings show that co-designing the rubric checklist with students increased their motivation and enhanced students' confidence in completing the task. In addition, students ga ined enormous benefits from using the rubric checklist as a self-assessment tool. Reflecting critically on the feedback received from students and tutors the authors argue that for enhanced student engagement in the teaching and learning process they should be involved as active participants in the assessment processes. In addition, students need to learn to assess the quality of their own work early in their academic career with continuous guided practice throughout their studies with the intention of making the practice of self-assessment a norm rather than an exception, thereby creating independent reflective learners.

Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students

“…Analytic rubrics are more reliable than holistic rubrics in that they check the key content, rather than providing a holistic evaluation [13]. Analytic rubrics provide specific feedback according to several sections or dimensions, allow students to identify which factors are missing from the holistic rubric, and enable continuous monitoring [14]. Analytic scoring refers to a process of assigning points to individual traits present in the performance and adding the points to derive single or multiple dimension scores.…”

Assessment Rubric for Research Report Writing: A Tool for Supervision

“…Students self-regulate their learning and success when they are able to self-assess their learning using appropriate and sufficient criteria, guidelines, or indicators (Andrade & Valtcheva, 2009;Panadero & Romero, 2014). There are at least three crucial factors for conducting self-assessment: (1) using sufficient, task-specific, assessment criteria (Dawson, 2017;Popham, 1997;Rusman & Dirkx, 2017;Tierney & Simon, 2004); (2) using criteria at an appropriate time (Jönsson, 2014;Nordrum et al, 2013;Torrance, 2007); and (3) having the opportunity to revise and improve performance or task (Andrade & Valtcheva, 2009;Bharuthram & Patel, 2017;Caughlan & Jiang, 2014;Dochy et al, 2006). Essentially, results generally suggest higher achievement and deeper learning by students who have rubrics to guide their work (Andrade & Valtcheva, 2009;Howell, 2011;Petkov & Petkova, 2006).…”

“…The sub-set scores in an analytic rubric help students identify more specific and concrete writing skills. When instructors provide students with those scores (not just the overall grade) along with either verbal or written feedback (Carson & Kavish, 2018;Nordrum et al, 2013;Nurie, 2018), or both (Caughlan & Jiang, 2014;Lipnevich et al, 2014;Teater, 2011), both instructors and students can formulate plans for improvement (Bharuthram & Patel, 2017;Thurlings et al, 2013). Carson and Kavish (2018) and Nordrum et al (2013) combined the use of in-text feedback and rubrics for writing tasks.…”

Diseño y validación de un instrumento de evaluación de TFG

“…Dos de los más comunes son las rúbricas y las listas de verificación (Cañadas, 2020). Ambas pueden ser usadas como instrumentos de autoevaluación (Bharuthram y Patel, 2017), y a la vez como instrumentos para la heteroevaluación, cumpliendo con la función certificadora de la evaluación. Aunque habitualmente se ha considerado a la rúbrica como una herramienta para evaluar el logro de estándares o describir la calidad de un trabajo, existen muchas otras de formas de evaluar que potencian la transparencia (Bearman y Ajjawi, 2018), entendida esta como el conocimiento del alumno sobre el propósito y los criterios de evaluación (Jonsson, 2014).…”

“…En su estudio de validación de la homogeneidad de un modelo de rúbrica de evaluación del TFG en el grado de Enfermería, Sánchez (2021) encontró una homogeneidad baja tras aplicar el coeficiente de correlación intraclase (ICC). A pesar de la incertidumbre asociada a la definición de la rúbrica y sus usos, esta ha ido ganando popularidad a lo largo de los años como una herramienta de evaluación importante en relación con el aprendizaje, al brindar mayor transparencia en las evaluaciones (Bharuthram y Patel, 2017).…”