The “Rubric Team”: A Vehicle for Promoting Engagement in

The “Rubric Team”: A Vehicle for Promoting
Engagement in Assessment
Rossi Hassad, PhD
Matthijs Koopmans, EdD
Susan Waddington, PhD
Mercy College, New York
ANNY Conference, 1st May, 2015
OBJECTIVE
To present and discuss the “Rubric Team”
concept as a “best practice” model for
fostering interest and engagement in
meaningful and constructive assessment of
student learning.
CONTEXT & RATIONALE
• For assessment of student learning to be meaningful, effective
and sustainable, it must have intrinsic value to faculty.
• Assessment has its own body of knowledge; terminology,
processes, and systems.
• It is tenuous to assume that all faculty regardless of discipline
and academic preparation will readily understand and
embrace assessment.
• Instead engagement and sustainability have to be facilitated
(and supported) in an evidence-based manner - based on
models and theories of change.
• The “Rubric” was envisioned as a tool that could be effective
and efficient in this regard.
THE RUBRIC
• A rubric is a tool for assessing student knowledge, dispositions and skills,
and providing meaningful feedback – with reference to objective (s).
• Typically, a rubric lists key criteria (cognitive, affective, and skills that
students are required to demonstrate), with a rating scale, and
descriptors for the quality of performance for each criterion.
• Rubrics bring clarity, thoughtfulness, and consistency to the grading
process and make grading more objective, constructive , and efficient.
• Rubrics can be used for a variety of assignments.
Criteria
Level of Performance (Rating Scale)
Beginning
Emerging
Criterion 1
Criterion 2
Criterion 3
Descriptor
Proficient
Mastery
THE RUBRIC TEAM CONCEPT
 A collaboration between faculty and staff experts
 Faculty-Led with 12 members
 Multidisciplinary (technical and content experts)
 A multifaceted approach:
Closing the Loop








Needs Assessment
Targeted training and support
Individual, small-group, mentoring
Technology support and
hands-on sessions
Online resources: rubrics, videos
Consultations as needed
Team debriefing sessions
Assessment of the rubric team work
Data Analysis and
Interpretation
Implementation
and Technology
Design
Measurement
Concepts
Learning
Objective
RUBRIC
CONSIDERATIONS AND THEORETICAL BASIS
Consider barriers/concerns/facilitators to change,
adoption of of technology and innovation
Heterogeneity of the faculty body
Stages of engagement and adoption
Perceived
Usefulness
or Benefits
Competence
or SelfEfficacy
Relatedness
or Support
Autonomy
The MAGIC of the Rubric
Facilitates discourse,
reflection, metacognition and
discovery
Promotes
engagement,
diffusion, and
sustainability
Enables
collaboration
RUBRIC
Enhances selfEfficacy
Fosters collegiality
Results in
meaningful
assessment of
student learning
NEXT
• Matt will address the wider context
underpinning assessment and the use of
rubrics
• Susan will address assessment of the work of
the Rubric team w Thanks.
Acknowledgements
Members of the Assessment Rubric Team
Carol Bennett-Speight
Ann Gedrich
Graham Glynn
Rossi A. Hassad
Nancy Heilbronner
Matthijs Koopmans
Kathleen Landy
Matt Lewis
Howard Miller
Associate Professor and Director of Social Work,
Assessment Coordinator, School of Social and
Behavior Sciences
Instructional Designer
Vice Provost & Executive Dean for
CollegeWide Programs
Professor, School of Social & Behavioral Sciences,
Chair of CASL – Committee on Assessment of
Student Learning
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, School of
Education
Associate Professor & Assessment Coordinator,
School of Education
Associate Director / Director for High-Impact
Teaching and Learning, Office for Teaching
Excellence and Engaged Learning
Instructional Designer, Office for Teaching
Excellence and Engaged Learning
Professor of Education and Chair, Department
of Secondary Education, School of Education
Elena Nitecki
Associate Professor, Childhood Education, School
of Education
Tori Mondelli
Executive Director, Office for Teaching
Excellence and Engaged Learned (OTEEL)
Assessment Analyst
Susan Waddington
Team Co-Chair
Team Co-Chair