Contextualising sample marking rubrics for assessing learning outcomes

Marking Rubrics

A marking rubric is an assessment tool that helps educators clearly articulate expected standards and evaluate student performance and their learning. The current Deakin Assessment (Higher Education Courses) Procedure defines a marking rubric as “a tool used to articulate expected standards at various levels of performance in assessment. The criteria for each level of performance (from ‘high distinction’ through to ‘fail’) are explicitly described in clear language to assist students to understand and interpret these descriptions.”

For students, rubrics can help to improve the quality of student work and their learning by providing detailed feedback about various aspects of their performance in an assessment task. We know from the literature that timely, detailed, and clear feedback is key to improved student learning. Rubrics can improve and monitor student performance by making teachers’ expectations explicitly and by showing students how to meet these expectations. They enable students to judge the quality of their own work, and help them to not only identify their strength and weaknesses but also provide them with feedback on how to improve particular aspects of their work.

Rubrics also help educators in clearly articulating their expectations of standards and student performance using both qualitative and quantitative elements. For unit teaching teams, rubrics can help minimise the potential risk for inconsistent grading and feedback, when multiple markers are involved in a teaching team, as well as benefit from reduced grading time with a stronger focus on providing quality student feedback.

Rubrics may be used for a variety of purposes. In this proposal we are discussing and recommending consistency in the development and implementation of a marking rubric for the purpose of assessing learning outcomes.

Defining Performance Indicators and Levels

For consistency with AACSB and DLF practice there are three ‘baseline performance indicators’ that can provide the overarching framework for the rubrics we apply:

“Yet to achieve minimum standard” – “Meets standard” – “Exceeds standard”.

These are reflected in the Table 1 below which shows how the three baseline performance indicators provide the overarching rubric framework.

Developing performance level descriptors in rubrics

Matriceswith the three ‘baseline performance indicators’ have been developed for all generic GLOs (ie with the exception of GLO1 – Discipline specific knowledge and capabilities) at both AQF7 (Bachelors level) and AQF9 (Masters level). The DLF suite of rubrics may be accessed at:http://www.deakin.edu.au/learning-futures/enhancing-courses/index.php. These rubrics are course level (‘holistic) rubrics that set out performance criteria and standards that graduates of a course should meet on completion of their course. Course teams can use and modify these as a basis to contextualise measureable criteria in assessments and to help define the performance to be used in the marking rubric, making necessary adjustments to take into account the year level of the unit of study.

Feedback from Associate Heads of School suggests that most academic staff will wish to employ rubrics with five performance levels that directly correlate with our standard grading schema (i.e. fail, pass, credit, distinction, high distinction). Whilst this appears to be the norm, other performance levels can be accommodated, provided:

(i)the matrix provides a clearly articulated distinction between the standards expected within each of the sub-levels,AND

(ii)each performance level directly correspondsto one of the three baseline indicators(yet to achieve, meets or exceeds).

To assist in this, the following Table 1 shows an alignment of terms that may be used within each of the performance levels (note the alignment between the ‘norm’ grading schema and the three baseline levels). The Rubric structure is the template that will be adopted across the faculty to help staff develop and design their marking rubrics for assessment.

Note that it is up to course teams and unit chairs to decide on the appropriate number and type of criteria used in the marking rubric. A Weighted score should accompany each criterion to determine its weighting as part of the overall marking rubric.

Table 2 shows a summary of criteria identified by DLF for each of the Deakin Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLOs).

Table 3 to Table 10 shows examples of marking rubrics for AQF 9Masters degree as contextualised from Deakin Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLOs).

Table 1- Rubric structure template

Performance Indicators
Performance Levels
Criteria / YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD / MEETS STANDARD / EXCEEDS STANDARD
Fail (N) /0-49
Poor/unacceptable/Not attempted/requires further development)/needs improvement / Pass (P)/ 50-59
Acceptable/ Satisfactory/ Proficient / Credit (C)/60-69
Good/Well done / Distinction (D)/ 70-79
Very good/ exceeds expectations / High Distinction (HD)/80-100
Excellent/ exemplary/exceeding high standard
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Add more as appropriate
(Total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Overall
(Total marks: …) / 0-49
Or equivalent (N) / 50-59
Or equivalent (P) / 60-69
Or equivalent (C) / 70-79
Or equivalent (D) / 80-100
Or equivalent (HD)

Table 2 - Summary of criteria identified by DLF for each of the Deakin Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLOs)

Graduate Learning Outcome /
Discipline specific /
Communication /
Digital Literacy /
Critical Thinking /
Problem Solving /
Self-management /
Teamwork /
Global Citizenship
Criteria / Defined by course team and within any related professional / discipline standards or threshold learning outcomes / □Context, audience and purpose / □Digital proficiency / □Explanation of issues / □Defining the problem / □Intellectual curiosity and independence / □Constructive teamwork / □Cultural self- awareness
□Content development / □Determination of the extent of information needed / □Evaluation of information / □Creative thinking / □Independent intellectual connection / □Facilitating the contributions of team members / □Diversity of communities and cultures
□Genre and disciplinary conventions / □Ability to access the needed information / □Existing knowledge, research, and/or views / □Identification of strategies / □Reflection / □Team commitment / □Knowledge of cultural worldview frameworks
□English proficiency / □Sources and evidence / □Analysis / □Proposing solutions / □Career planning and development / □Responds to conflict / □Empathy
□Oral presentation delivery / □Evaluation of information / □Inquiry design / □Evaluating solutions / □Professional readiness / □Application of knowledge and skills / □Civic engagement
□Interpersonal communication / □Use Information to accomplish a specific purpose / □Presenting and defending a position / □Implementing solutions / □Application of skills and knowledge / □Ethical self-awareness
□Application of communication / □Access and use information ethically and legally / □Limitations and implications / □Ethical issue recognition
□Digital communication / □Adaptability
….plus others as identified and defined by course team

Sample marking rubric for AQF 9Masters degree as contextualised from Deakin Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLOs)

Table 3 Deakin Graduate Learning Outcome 1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities (AQF level 9 degree)

Performance
Indicators / YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD / MEETS STANDARD / EXCEEDS STANDARD
Fail (N) /0-49
Poor/unacceptable/Not attempted/requires further development/needs improvement / Pass (P)/ 50-59
Acceptable/Satisfactory/ Proficient / Credit (C)/60-69
Good/Well done / Distinction (D)/ 70-79
Very good/ exceeds expectations / High Distinction (HD)/80-100
Excellent/exemplary/exceeding high standard
CRITERIA
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Criterion
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Add more as appropriate
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Overall
(Total marks: …) / 0-49
Or equivalent (N) / 50-59
Or equivalent (P) / 60-69
Or equivalent (C) / 70-79
Or equivalent (D) / 80-100
Or equivalent (HD)

Table 4Deakin Graduate Learning Outcome 2: Communication (AQF level 9) -Using oral, written and interpersonal communication to inform, motivate and effect change

Performance
Indicators
CRITERIA
/ YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD / MEETS STANDARD / EXCEEDS STANDARD
Fail (N) /0-49
Poor/unacceptable/Not attempted/requires further development/needs improvement / Pass (P)/ 50-59
Acceptable/Satisfactory/Proficient / Credit (C)/60-69
Good/Well done / Distinction (D)/ 70-79
Very good/ exceeds expectations / High Distinction (HD)/80-100
Excellent/exemplary/exceeding high standard
Context, audience and purpose
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Demonstrates no awareness of context and/or purpose so that the audience is very unlikely to be engaged, informed or motivated and complex knowledge and ideas are not transferred effectively. / Demonstrates inconsistent awareness of context and/or purpose so that the audience is unlikely to be engaged, informed or motivated and complex knowledge and ideas are not transferred effectively. / Demonstrates an advanced and integrated understanding of context and/or purpose so that specialist and non-specialist audiences are slightly engaged, informed and motivated and complex knowledge and ideas may be transferred effectively. / Demonstrates a very advanced and integrated understanding of context and/or purpose so that specialist and non-specialist audiences are fairly engaged, informed and motivated and complex knowledge and ideas may be transferred effectively. / Consistently demonstrates a systematic and critical understanding of context and purpose so that the specialist and non-specialist audiences are highly engaged, informed and motivated. / Consistently demonstrates an exemplary and comprehensive, systematic and critical understanding of context and purpose so that the specialist and non-specialist audiences are outstandingly engaged, informed and motivated.
Content Development
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Always uses inappropriate and/or irrelevant content to develop and explore basic ideas and presents an unacceptableexposition of complex knowledge and ideas. / Mostly uses inappropriate and/or irrelevant content to develop and explore basic ideas and presents an unclear and incoherent exposition of complex knowledge and ideas. / Moderately uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate mastery of the subject or topic and presents a clear, coherent, independent and professional exposition of complex knowledge and ideas / Mostly uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate mastery of the subject or topic and presents a clear, coherent, independent and professional exposition of complex knowledge and ideas / Consistently uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate a mastery of the subject or topic and generates original knowledge and understanding, making a substantial contribution to a discipline or area of professional practice. / Consistently and effectively uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate a mastery of the subject or topic and generates original knowledge and understanding, making a verysubstantial contribution to a discipline or area of professional practice.
Genre and Disciplinary Conventions
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Conflictingand/or absence of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices / Inconsistently uses important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices / Satisfactorily uses a range of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices. / Expertly uses a range of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices. / Consistently demonstrates detailed attention to and expert execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices. / Consistently and intelligently demonstrates detailed attention to and expert execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices.
English proficiency
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Alwaysuses basic English marred by errors that frequently impede meaning. / Mostly uses basic English marred by errors that frequently impede meaning. / Satisfactorily uses advanced, graceful English that expertly conveys meaning with clarity and fluency. / Competently uses advanced, graceful English that expertly conveys meaning with clarity and fluency. / Consistently uses graceful and sophisticated English that skilfully communicates meaning with clarity and fluency, and is almostvirtually error-free. / Consistently uses graceful and sophisticated English that skilfully communicates meaning with high level of clarity and fluency, and is virtually error-free.
Oral presentation delivery
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, visual aids and vocal expressiveness) make oral presentation always difficult to follow. / Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, visual aids and vocal expressiveness) sometimesmake oral presentation difficult to follow. / Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, visual aids and vocal expressiveness) make oral presentation satisfactorilyinteresting, credible compelling, polished, and engaging. / Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, visual aids and vocal expressiveness) make oral presentation reasonablyinteresting, credible, compelling, polished, and engaging. / Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, visual aids and vocal expressiveness) make oral presentation mostlyauthoritative, interesting, credible, compelling, polished, and engaging. / Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, visual aids and vocal expressiveness) make oral presentation consistentlyauthoritative, interesting, credible, compelling, polished, and engaging.
Interpersonal communication
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Interpersonal communication with individuals and groups does not consistently demonstrate expert emotional intelligence, sensitivity, and appropriate behaviour (such as eye contact, gesture). / Interpersonal communication with individuals and groups rarely consistently demonstrates expert emotional intelligence, sensitivity, and appropriate behaviour (such as eye contact, gesture). / Interpersonal communication with individuals and groups oftenexpertly demonstrates emotional intelligence, sensitivity, and appropriate behaviour (such as eye contact, gesture). / Interpersonal communication with individuals and groups mostlyexpertly demonstrates emotional intelligence, sensitivity, and appropriate behaviour (such as eye contact, gesture). / Very good interpersonal communication with individuals and groups expertly demonstrates a high level of emotional intelligence, sensitivity, and appropriate behaviour (such as eye contact, gesture). / Exemplary interpersonal communication with individuals and groups alwaysexpertly demonstrates a veryhigh level of emotional intelligence, sensitivity, and appropriate behaviour (such as eye contact, gesture).
Application of communication
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Provides only general advice which does not demonstrate a well-developed sense of judgement, responsibility and autonomy. Is unable to justify and correctly interpret theoretical propositions, methodologies, conclusions and professional decisions to specialist and non-specialist audiences. Analyses and theorises (using a very basic range of theories) about developments that contributes little to professional practice or scholarship. / Provides only general advice which very little demonstrates a well-developed sense of judgement, responsibility and autonomy. Is very little able to justify and correctly interpret theoretical propositions, methodologies, conclusions and professional decisions to specialist and non-specialist audiences. Analyses and theorises (using a very limited range of theories) about developments that contributes little to professional practice or scholarship. / Provides satisfactoryspecialist advice on a range of issues demonstrating expert judgement, adaptability, responsibility and autonomy as a practitioner or learner. Acceptably justifies and interprets theoretical propositions, methodologies, conclusions and professional decisions to specialist and non-specialist audiences. Satisfactorily analyses and theorises (using a moderate range of theories) about developments that contribute to professional practice or scholarship. / Provides expert specialist advice on a range of issues demonstrating expert judgement, adaptability, responsibility and autonomy as a practitioner or learner. Justifies and interprets theoretical propositions, methodologies, conclusions and professional decisions to specialist and non-specialist audiences. Reasonably well analyses and theorises (using a moderate range of theories) about developments that contribute to professional practice or scholarship. / Provides specialist advice on a range of issues, demonstrating, authoritative, judgement, responsibility, a high level of autonomy and experience. Justifies and interprets a wide range of theoretical propositions, methodologies, conclusions and professional decisions to specialist and non-specialist audiences. Very well analyses and theorises (drawing on a large body of theories and discerning the most applicable ones), about developments that contribute to professional practice or scholarship. / Consistently provides specialist advice on a wide range of issues, demonstrating, authoritative, expert judgement, responsibility, anexceptional level of autonomy and experience. Justifies and interprets a wide range of theoretical propositions, methodologies, conclusions and professional decisions to specialist and non-specialist audiences. Exceedingly well analyses and theorises (drawing on a large body of theories and discerning the most applicable ones), about developments that contribute to professional practice or scholarship.
Add as appropriate
(Weighted score/total marks: …) / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors / Descriptors
Overall
(Total marks: …) / 0-49
Or equivalent (N) / 50-59
Or equivalent (P) / 60-69
Or equivalent (C) / 70-79
Or equivalent (D) / 80-100
Or equivalent (HD)

Table 5Deakin Graduate Learning Outcome 3: Digital literacy (AQF level 9) -Using technologies to find, use and disseminate information

Performance