Developing & Applying Rubrics To Improve Student Performance Christine A. Hamilton, DHSc, RRT Program Director, Tennessee State University

Objectives Describe the essential parts of a rubric. Discuss the steps in developing a detailed rubric. Develop a sample rubric related to the participant’s professional setting.

Roadmap to Success Rubrics give a roadmap to students on how to meet the instructor’s (and programmatic) expectations. By developing rubrics, standards of performance are delineated, giving students a clear picture of how to succeed.

Evaluate Why Use a Rubric? Criterion – referenced assessment Inter-rater reliability Evaluate

Guide Why Use a Rubric? Do you value student self-assessment? Aids development of student skills Clarifies the relative importance of each section of an assessment Leads to strengthening the foundational skills Guide

Matrix Model A (Excellent) 9 - 10 points B (Very Good) 8 points C (Average) 7 points D (Below Average) 6 points F (Unacceptable) 0 – 5 points Criterion 1 Description Criterion 2

Continua Model of a GTMJ Christie M, et al. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2015;15(5):22-35.

Creating a Rubric 1. Design our own based on outcomes to be assessed. 2. Modify an existing criterion-referenced assessment (rubric) Excellent compilation by Mary J. Allen “Using Rubrics to Grade, Assess, and Improve Student Learning” Another source of rubrics: http://rubistar.4teachers.org Be sure to validate by reviewing the rubric with other faculty or Advisory Committee members. Perform a test case and show inter-rater reliability of the assessment tool.

Research Writing Rubric Criteria Level 4 25 points Level 3 18 points Level 2 10 points Level 1 0 points Score and Feedback Hypothesis, introduction & quality of literature Excellent research statement, introduction and quality of literature reviewed (references). Good research statement and introduction. Mediocre quality of literature reviewed (references) such as too many Internet sources and not enough evidence- based research. Poor research statement and introduction. Poor quality of literature reviewed (references) such as more than 10 years old, or too many Internet sources, or mostly text books and not enough evidence- based research. Lacking research statement and introduction. Poor quality of literature reviewed.   25 points Method of study and body of paper Well done method of study and excellent development of the body of the paper. Used headings to separate major content areas. Good method of study but inconsistent  developm ent of the body of the paper. Poor method of study and inconsistent  developm ent of the body of the paper. Missing method of study and inconsistent  developm ent of the body of the paper.

Discussion / conclusion, abstract Excellent discussion / conclusion that summarizes the major points of the paper, and good abstract (if 20 ref. paper). Good discussion / conclusion but doesn't follow the major points of the paper. Poor discussion / conclusion; summary of major points is unclear. Missing discussion / conclusion.   25 points Excellent discussion / conclusion that summarizes the major points of the paper, and good abstract (if 20 ref. paper). AMA format, spelling/grammar, structure Excellent AMA format, spelling/grammar, structure Good AMA format, spelling/grammar, structure Some errors in format, but less than 2 errors per page related to AMA format, spelling/grammar, structure. Many errors in format, more than 2 errors per page related to AMA format, spelling/grammar, structure. 18 points Good AMA format, spelling/grammar, structure Overall Score A 93 or more B 84 or more C 75 or more D 0 or more Score and Feedback A B C less than acceptable 93 points A - Excellent paper! Overall score will be calculated when all criteria have been assessed.

Practice Choose a project with clear outcomes. Example: Case Study Presentation Write 1 criterion for successful completion of the project. Example: Interpretation of Patient’s Lab Values Define excellence in completing this criterion. Excellent: All pertinent lab values are presented clearly, compared to normal range, and an accurate and comprehensive interpretation of the results are given. Define a very weak or unacceptable characteristic of this criterion. Unacceptable: Missing pertinent lab values, inaccurate interpretation of results. Next define the middle zone: Average and Needs Improvement Assign points to each level. Repeat the process with another criterion.

CoARC Degree Advancement Program Standard: DA3.5 The program must formulate a systematic assessment process to evaluate the expected student learning outcomes (ESLOs) defined in DA3.4. Rubrics must be established for each of the ESLOs and made known to the students prior to their evaluations. Based on the results of the assessment process, the program must make adjustments to the curriculum as needed, but no less than annually. Evidence of Compliance: • Rubrics for all ESLOs included in all course syllabi and in the student handbook; • Annual Report of Current Status (RCS) documenting ESLOs; • Minutes of faculty and advisory committee meetings.

References Christie M, Grainger P, Dahlgren R, Call K, Heck D, Simon S. Improving the quality of assessment grading tools in master of education courses: a comparative case study in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2015;15(5):22-35. doi: 10.14434/josotl.v15i5.13783 Allen MJ. Using rubrics to grade, assess, and improve student learning. From a presentation at Miami- Dade College, March 7, 2014. http://www.mdc.edu/sailearn/documents/4.1%20Rubric%20Workshop%20Handout-Mary%20Allen.pdf Accessed June 8, 2016. ALTEC at University of Kansas. Rubistar. Create Rubrics for Your Project-Based Learning Activities. http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php Accessed May 31, 2016. Commission on Accreditation for Respiratory Care. Accreditation Standards for Degree Advancement Programs in Respiratory Care. 2015. http://www.coarc.com Accessed June 8, 2016.