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

3. 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.

4. 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.

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

6. 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

7. 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

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

9. 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:
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.

10. Research Writing Rubric
Criteria
Level points
Level points
Level points
Level 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. 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): doi: /josotl.v15i
Allen MJ. Using rubrics to grade, assess, and improve student learning. From a presentation at Miami- Dade College, March 7, Accessed June 8, 2016.
ALTEC at University of Kansas. Rubistar. Create Rubrics for Your Project-Based Learning Activities. Accessed May 31, 2016.
Commission on Accreditation for Respiratory Care. Accreditation Standards for Degree Advancement Programs in Respiratory Care Accessed June 8, 2016.