Rubric Examples



Download 0.64 Mb.
Page5/18
Date03.05.2017
Size0.64 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   18

SCORE 0


Designates a speech that has clearly not been developed on the assigned topic or makes no attempt to answer the given question or relate to the given topic.
This rubric is based upon the scoring rubric used by the Writing Outcomes Program at Southeast Missouri State University.
Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric

Facione and Facione

4


Consistently does all or almost all of the following:

Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

Identifies the salient arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.

Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view.

Draws warranted, judicious, non-fallacious conclusions.

Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons.

Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.

3


Does most or many of the following:

Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

Identifies relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.

Offers analyses and evaluations of obvious alternative points of view.

Draws warranted, non-fallacious conclusions.

Justifies some results or procedures, explains reasons.

Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.

2


Does most or many of the following:

Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

Fails to identify strong, relevant counter-arguments.

Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.

Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions.

Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons.

Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.

1


Consistently does all or almost all of the following:

Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the points of view of others.

Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counter-arguments.

Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.

Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons, and unwarranted claims.

Does not justify results or procedures, nor explain reasons.

Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.

Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason.


(c) 1994, Peter A. Facione, Noreen C. Facione, and The California Academic Press. 217 La Cruz Ave., Millbrae, CA 94030.

Permission is hereby granted to students, faculty, staff, or administrators at public or nonprofit educational institutions for unlimited duplication of the critical thinking scoring rubric, rating form, or instructions herein for local teaching, assessment, research, or other educational and noncommercial uses, provided that no part of the scoring rubric is altered and that "Facione and Facione" are cited as authors.
Retrieved September 2, 2005 from http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/rubric.pdf

Portland State University Studies Program Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric*
Inquiry and Critical Thinking Rubric

Students will learn various modes of inquiry through interdisciplinary curricula—problem posing, investigating, conceptualizing—in order to become active, self-motivated, and empowered learners.





6 (Highest)—Consistently does all or almost all of the following:

  • Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

  • Identifies the salient arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.

  • Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view.

  • Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event.

  • Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons.

  • Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.

  • Makes ethical judgments.



5—Does most the following:

  • Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

  • Thinks through issues by identifying relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.

  • Offers analysis and evaluation of obvious alternative points of view.

  • Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event.

  • Justifies (by using) some results or procedures, explains reasons.

  • Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.



4—Does most the following:

  • Describes events, people, and places with some supporting details from the source.

  • Make connections to sources, either personal or analytic.

  • Demonstrates a basic ability to analyze, interpret, and formulate inferences.

  • States or briefly includes more than one perspective in discussing literature, experiences, and points of view of others.

  • Takes some risks by occasionally questioning sources or by stating interpretations and predictions.

  • Demonstrates little evidence of rethinking or refinement of one’s own perspective.



3—Does most or many of the following:

  • Respond by retelling or graphically showing events or facts.

  • Makes personal connections or identifies connections within or between sources in a limited way. Is beginning to use appropriate evidence to back ideas.

  • Discusses literature, experiences, and points of view of others in terms of own experience.

  • Responds to sources at factual or literal level.

  • Includes little or no evidence of refinement of initial response or shift in dualistic thinking.

  • Demonstrates difficulty with organization and thinking is uneven.



2—Does many or most the following:

  • Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

  • Fails to identify strong, relevant counter arguments.

  • Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions.

  • Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons.

  • Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.



1 (lowest)—Consistently does all or almost all of the following:

  • Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the points of view of others.

  • Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counterarguments.

  • Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view. Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons and unwarranted claims.

  • Does not justify results or procedures, nor explain reasons.

  • Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason.



X—No basis for scoring. (Use only for missing or malfunctioning portfolios.)

*taken verbatim from Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2005). Introduction to Rubrics. Sterling, VA: Stylus, pp. 122-123




Levels of Leadership

Bowling Green University, http://folios.bgsu.edu/assessment/Rubrics.htm, downloaded March 21, 2002


“Leading” involves guiding a group to achieve its goal.  It does not require formal authority or power, but is more a matter of influence, integrity, spirit, and respect.  Leadership quality in this course will be evaluated using the features defining the four levels shown below. 

   

Level 1 Leadership (Beginner)


  • Gives an impression of reluctance or uncertainty about exercising leadership

  • Focuses exclusively on the task to be accomplished without regard to the people, or focuses exclusively on the interpersonal relations and attitudes of people in the group without regard to the task

  • Asks for ideas or suggestions without intending to consider them

  • May show favoritism to one or more group members

  • Takes the group off track

Level 2  Leadership (Novice)


  • Shows occasional signs of insecurity about leading, or is overly confident about own leadership skills

  • Gives too much attention to the task or to interpersonal relations in the group

  • Asks for ideas and suggestions but neglects to consider them

  • Lets the group ramble or stray off track too much, or keeps the group so rigidly on track that relevant issues or concerns are ignored

  • Has an agenda and goals for the group

Level 3 Leadership (Proficient)


  • Looks comfortable and confident in exercising leadership duties

  • Circulates a prepared agenda in advance

  • Balances the need for task accomplishment with the needs of individuals in the group

  • Listens actively and shows understanding by paraphrasing or by acknowledging and building on others’ ideas

  • Shows respect to all group members

  • Shares information openly

  • Assigns tasks by seeking volunteers, delegating as needed

  • Checks for agreement, acceptance, buy-in

  • Gives recognition and encouragement

Level 4 Leadership (Advanced)


All of the positive features of proficient leadership, plus:

  • Engages all group members

  • Keeps the group on track by managing time, providing coaching or guidance, using humor, or resolving differences, as needed

  • Intervenes when tasks are not moving toward goals

  • Involves the group in setting challenging goals and planning for their accomplishment

  • Helps others to provide leadership


Download 0.64 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   18




The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2020
send message

    Main page