Presentation by Dr. Stella C.S. Porto
Part IV, Two Examples (Porto), and References
Transcript of Video, with PPT images
Graduate School Faculty Meeting
February 28, 2004
Im looking first at one of my term paper rubrics.
Sample Rubric for Grading a Term Paper
Created by Dr. Stella Porto, adapted in part from a variety of Internet resources.
Presented at UMUC Graduate School Workshop Feb. 28, 2004.
| Qualities Criteria | Poor (1-2) | Good (3-4) | Excellent (5) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Introduction Title; Objective or Thesis; Problem statement; Orientation to reader; Topic. weight: 5% of paper grade score (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) x 1 = | a. There is no reference to the topic, problem, or audience. b. There is no statement of thesis or objective of the research. c. The title is inappropriate and does not describe the topic. | a. The writer makes the reader aware of the overall problem, challenge, or topic to be examined. b. Thesis is stated but clarity and/or focus could be better. c. The title does not adequately describe the topic. | a.
The writer introduces the topic and its relevance to (1) the
discipline; and (2) the chosen audience. The introduction lays
groundwork for the direction of the paper. b. Thesis or objective is clearly stated and appropriately focused. c. Main idea stands along with details. d. The title is appropriate and adequately describes the topic. |
| Body Structure; Flow; Organization and Development weight: 20% of paper grade score (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) x 4 = | a. The paper has little to no direction, with disjointed subtopics. b. Text is repetitious. c. Information seems to be disorganized and has little to do with the main topic. d. Lacks a thesis or controlling idea. e. Sentences do not relate to the paragraphs main idea. f. Paragraphs do not clearly or effectively relate to the papers thesis or controlling idea. g. Examples are either lacking or ineffective (i.e., do not relate to the main idea in the paper or paragraph) | a.
There is a basic flow from one section to the next, but not all
sections or paragraphs follow in a natural or logical order. b. Ideas are clear, but there is a lack of extra information. c. Information relates to main topic. Details and amount of information are sparse. d. Includes a basic thesis or controlling idea. e. Sentences mostly relate to the paragraphs main idea. f. Paragraphs generally though not always relate to the thesis or controlling idea. g. Examples are included, though not always; reader needs specific details or quotes that the writer does not provide. | a.
The paper flows from general ideas to specific conclusions and/or
vice-versa. All sections follow a logical order. Transitions tie
together sections as well as individual paragraphs. b. Ideas are clear, original, and focused. Main idea stands along with details. c. Sufficient information included. Information clearly relates to the main relates to the main thesis. It includes several supporting details and/or examples. d. Provides a clear and compelling thesis. e. Sentences clearly relate to the paragraphs main idea . f. Paragraphs clearly and effectively relate to and support the thesis. g. Writer provides examples and quotes that answer the readers questions and add depth to the writers ideas. |
| Content Weaving together literature through synthesis via thematic categories that provide exploration/explanation weight: 35% of paper grade score (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) x 7 = | a. The writer has omitted major sections of pertinent content or content runs on excessively. b. The writer quotes other material excessively. c. The ideas presented have little significance to the discipline and/or the audience. d. Text is repetitious. e. There is no central theme. f. Ideas in the paper are irrelevant or not worthy of the readers consideration. | a.
The writer includes all the sections of pertinent content, but does not
cover them in as much depth or detail as the audience/reader expects. b. The significance to the discipline is evident. c. Ideas are clear, but more information is needed. d. Ideas in the paper are mostly (but not all) relevant and worthy of the readers consideration. | a. The writer covers the appropriate content in depth without being redundant. b. The writer cites sources when specific statements are made. c. The significance of quotes, when used, is apparent. d. The length is appropriate. e. Ideas are clear, original, and focused. Main idea stands out, along with details. f. Ideas in the paper are compelling, even original; they are not self-evident. |
| Clarity and Correctness of the Writing weight: 15% of paper grade score (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) x 3 = | a. It is difficult for the reader to understand what the writer is trying to express. b. Writing is convoluted. c. Paper contains spelling and grammatical errors as well as improper punctuation. d. The writing is vague or it is difficult to understand what the writer is trying to express. e. Mistakes in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation cause confusion and show lack of concern for quality of writing. f. Writing rambles; the paper appears hastily written. | a. The writing is generally clear, but unnecessary words are occasionally used. Meaning is sometimes hidden. b. Paragraph or sentence structure is repetitive. c. Much of the writing is generally clear, but meaning is sometimes hidden. d. Some mistakes in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation exist, but they do not cause confusion; they suggest negligence, not indifference. e. Writing might ramble; the paper is not carefully written. | a. The writing is clear and concise. b. There are no (or very few) mistakes in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation. c. The writing does not ramble; the paper is carefully written and edited. |
| Conclusions Synthesis of ideas and culminating in a research question, or suggestions for further research, or finalizing with a clear position. weight: 10% of paper grade score (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) x 2 = | a.
There is little or no indication that the writer tried to synthesize
the information or draw conclusions based on the literature under
review. b. No research question(s) or suggestions are offered to the reader, or the position is not restated and made clear to the reader as a conclusion. | a.
The writer provides concluding remarks that show an analysis and
synthesis of ideas and information. Some of the conclusions, however,
are not supported in the body of the review. b. A follow-up research question or suggestion is offered to the reader, or the writers position is restated to make it clear to the reader. | a. The writer makes succinct and precise conclusions based on the review of literature. b. Insights into the problem/topic are appropriate. c. Conclusions are strongly supported within the paper. |
| Sources Citations Proper APA Format weight:15% of paper grade score (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) x 3 = | a. The writer does not include in-text citations for statements made in the review. b. References that are included in the References or Works Cited list are not cited in the text. c. An insufficient number of sources are cited and/or not accurately documented. d. The paper is not written in APA style. e. A review of literature has been omitted. f. No attention is given to people-first, non-discriminatory language. g. Scholarly sources are not cited in text and reference list. h. Sources are primarily from the popular press and/or the paper consists primarily of personal opinions. | a.
The writer cites sources within the body of the review and includes a
corresponding References list. Some formatting problems exist or
some elements are missing. b. An acceptable number of sources is cited. All sources are accurately documented, but some are not in the desired format. c. Paper is in APA style but with some errors. d. The body of the paper consists of a review of the literature. e. There is evidence of attention to people-first, non-discriminatory language. f. Most sources are scholarly and cited, but with some errors. g. Personal opinions are kept to a minimum though may not be delayed in the paper. | a. The writer includes all necessary citations in the body of the review. b. The references in the list match the in-text citations and all are properly cited in APA style. c. Numerous sources are cited. All sources are accurately documented. d. Accurately adheres to APA style in formatting, organization, and construction, including full review of relevant literature. e. There is consistent use of people-first, non-discriminatory language. f. The majority of sources are scholarly and cited correctly in both text and reference list. g. Personal opinions are delayed and stated succinctly in the conclusion. |
| Total Score = |
And as I said before, I use the analytical way of doing rubrics instead of looking at it in a holistic way.
I divided this into
- Introduction
- Body (in which Im actually looking at the way the text is organized)
- Content
-
etc.
Why do that, specifically? Its because in the technical courses, we have many students who know the content and are able to do great research in terms of the content, but when they have to build their own text and have flow, sometimes there is a lack of experience and they dont have good style. That hurts them in the other areas where they did very well.
So, this rubric here doesnt mean that any rubric of a term paper has do be this way. I had reasons, because of the students that I deal with, to build the rubric in this way
- I give weights to each of these parts. For instance, for the introduction, I might give something between five percent and ten percent. The body would be something like 15%. It depends a lot on the focus of the assignment.
I think that when you provide these rubrics to the students, you actually show them a lot of, not only your expectations, but a little bit of who you are and what you want with your course in a general sense. [You may see instructors] who will ask for 20% weight on the APA aspect and the ones for whom APA is not even part of the rubric. Its a good way for the online sessions, especially, because you describe yourself as an instructor through these mechanisms.
The other rubric that Im sharing here with you is a grading rubric for participation.
| Criteria | Poor | Good | Excellent |
| Significance | Students contributions do not add any richness to the conversation. The contributions repeat what others have said, and thus are not integrated in the thread of conversation. The contributions are not in students own words, but merely copy information on sites. | A good number of the students interventions are meaningful. In most cases, the contributions are well connected to the thread of conversation. The student in some cases asks good questions and initiates good threads. | The majority of the students posts are meaningful, no copies, integrated with the thread of discussion and adds to the learning experience. The student asks very good questions or makes important comments that generate good conversation in the class. |
| Timeliness | The student posts messages after the sessions are complete, and thus the information cannot be useful to others. It can in fact be distracting and annoying, because the sessions are over. | The student most of the time makes contributions when then threads are alive and worthy. People can still profit from the information. | The student always posts his/her contributions when the threads are still alive and flowing. |
| Frequency | Students comes less than 40% of the available sessions. | Student participates in between 40% and 80% of the available sessions. | Student participates in more than 80% of the available sessions. |
| Intensity | In sessions where the student participates, his/her participation is kept to a minimum, very strict (i.e., one contribution in the whole session). Student never takes any initiative in significant discussion. | In the sessions where the student participates, his/her participation is medium, with avg ___ contributions per session. Student sometimes takes inititaative in class discussion | In the sessions where the student participates, his/her contributions are numerous. Student frequently has a leading role of taking initiative in classroom discussions. |
| Collaborative | Student is not felt to be present in a collaborative way in the class. | In some situations, the student has tried to be collaborative | Student is clearly collaborative with others in the class in many situations (bringing new information useful to others, clarifying doubts, answering questions, promoting high spirits, promoting his/her peers.) |
- What I having been doing with my students is, at the end of the course, I ask them to do a self-evaluation of their participation, considering this rubric.
I started having the self-evaluation before I had this rubric laid out. I felt that they missed [my point]. What they talked about when I asked them to fill it out was things that were really not what I was expecting in terms of participation. That made it clear that they didnt know what I was considering high-quality participation. So, for example, the aspect of coming into the conference and just posting an answer to the main question is something that is very common, but I dont like it.
I think it was clear to them through the rubric that I was saying, Dont come in and answer the main question without reading the thread, and [not] have your response really be integrated into the thread and engaged with the conversation. Instead of being, you know, I did this totally offline. I dont even know what the others said and Im just going to post this. I didnt want that and [through the rubric] I think it came out very clearly to them that that was not what I wanted. And in fact, participation did get better.
One final thought, and that is,
If we were able to do that, we would learn a lot about the kinds of assessments that we did.
I have several references here:
- M. Dereshiwsky (2001), A is for Assessment: Identifying Online Assessment Practices and Perceptions, Ed at a Distance Magazine and Ed Journal, Vol. 15, No.1 ( ttp://www.usdla.org/html/journal/Jan01_Issue/article02.html )
- T.A. Angelo K.P. Cross (1993), Classroom Assessment Techniques, 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
- J. Morley (2000), Methods of Assessing Learning in Distance Education Courses, ed at a distance, Vol. 13 no.1 Classroom Assessment from Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, http://www.siue.edu/~deder/assess/cats
I would [recommend] Angelo and Cross. Some of you might have heard of their names. Theyre big, big names in this area. They have books and articles... Angelo appears in the American Association of Higher Education [writing] about assessment.
- T.A. Angelo (1999), Doing Assessment as if Learning Matters Most, AAHEBulletin, May
- G. Bensusan (2000), Subject:Whats Wrong with Tests?, Ed at a distance
ae is assessment and evaluation, Maricopa Center for Learning Instruction, http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/ae0/ - L. Suskie (2000), Fair Assessment Practices, AAHEBulletin, May.
Classroom Assessment, Center for Excellence in Learning Teaching, http://cstl.syr.edu/cstl/t-l/cls_asmt.htm - M.D. Roblyer L. Ekhaml, How Interactive are YOUR Distance Courses? A Rubric for Assessing Interaction in Distance Learning, http://www.westga.edu/~distance/roblyer32.html
- Why rubrics (nd). Technology (the portal for educators). http://www.teach-nology.com/tutorials/teaching/rubrics/
- Authentic Assessment Overview (nd). Teachervision.com. http://www.teachervision.fen.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4911.html?detoured=1
- What Is Authentic Assessment? (1997). http://www.eduplace.com/rdg/res/litass/auth.html
- Walvoord Anderson (1998) Effective grading. Jossey-Bass
Theres a book that I really liked a lot; this last book here, Effective Grading. This book is really very, very interesting and very practical in the sense of discussing grading. And it doesnt use the word rubric. It talks about criteria and standards and all that; the word rubric is not there. But all the major concepts about assessment and good assessment are there.
Go to transcripts of sections
- Using Rubrics, Part I - Introduction: Defining Holistic Assessment
- Using Rubrics, Part II - Defining Rubrics and their Benefits
- Using Rubrics, Part III - The Processes of Developing and Using Rubrics
- Using Rubrics, Part IV - Two Examples (Porto), and References