Analytic Rubrics
Analytic rubrics break down each criterion/trait into individual elements that are evaluated separately. This is accomplished by the instructor identifying key components or a project or other assignment, and creating a separte line for each one. Once the elements are created, the instructor must define the scale, and then writing specific criteria that constitute each level of the scale for all elements.
For example, let's say you wanted to evaluate students' oral communication skills based on a presentation assignment. The first step would be to determine how many elements comprise the skill of oral communication. You decide you want to evaluate the quality of the students': 1. delivery of the presentation, 2. content, 3. organization, and 4. audience interaction. Each element takes up a "row" in your rubric grid.
The next step is to define a scale. To accomplish this task, you must think about how you define different levels of quality. In theory, you could have 100 scale points! However, a 100-point would require a significant amount of your time to develop and define, and would most likely confuse your students. Typical rubric scales fall between 3 and 6 points. Start with 4 or 5 and then add more scale points if you feel the thresholds needs to be parsed out more, or reduce scale points if you feel the differences between them are becoming arbitrary.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Analytic rubrics are fantastic tools for provide students with formative feedback, as it helps them identify specific areas where they need to improve. They are also useful to you as an instructor because you can average the scores for each element and see how your class performs on the whole, which may help you identify areas of your curriculum that you need to improve.
The downside to analytic rubrics is that they are time-consuming, both to create and to use. Also, it may take a few iterations to determine the number of elements and/or scale points that works best for the given process or product. It is recommended to develop and use analytics rubrics for larger and/or high stakes assignments.
Holistic Rubrics
Holistic rubrics are formulated using the analytic rubric grid method. The instructor still defines a scale and writes standards for each level. However, the process or product is not broken down into various components, the scale applies to the overall performance. In other words, the instructor evaluates the process or product in its entirety.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Holistic rubrics take less time to develop and use than analytic rubrics. They are great for smaller assignments or in-class group work that may not need to be broken down into components for evaluation. Holistic rubrics provide students with summative feedback that gives them a general sense of how they performed on a task or assignment.
The downside to holistic rubrics is that they do not provide students with specific formative feedback, which is why they are not good for larger projects. They are also poor learning assessment tools because they do not help instructors identify specific areas of curricula to improve. It is recommended to develop and use holistic rubrics for smaller and/or inconsequential assignments.
Examples
Analytic Rubric Example
| Element | 1-Unacceptable | 2-Needs Improvement | 3-Satisfactory | 5-Exemplary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delivery | Unprepared; Stumbled over words; Lots of um's and uh's; Did not appear to know material; Exclusively read off of cards | Somewhat prepared; Minimal stumbling over words; Noticeable number of um's and uh's; Appeared to have vague understanding of material; Rarely presented without using cards | Adequately prepared; Minimal to no stumbling over words; Minimal to no um's and uh's; Appeared to have a solid understanding of material; Occasionally referred to cards during presentation | Well-prepared; No stumbling over words; No um's and uh's; Well-versed in material; Rarely or never referred to cards |
| Content | Content had limited substance; Did not use relevant or trustworthy sources | Content had some substance; Used minimal relevant or trustworthy sources | Content had solid substance; Used relevant and trustworty sources | Content had significant substance; All sources were relevant and trustworthy |
| Organization | Disorganized material; Impossible to follow presentation sequence | Somewhat organized material; Difficult to follow presentation sequence | Adequately organized material; Logical sequence and easy to follow | Well-orgranized material; Sequence was logical and easy to follow; Used an established organizational method |
| Audience Interaction | No eye contact; Did not sufficiently answer questions; Little to know give and take with audience members | Minimal eye contact; Answers to questions were vague and unhelpful; Minimal give and take with audience members | Adequte eye contact; Sufficiently answered questions; Sufficient give and take with audience members | Strong eye contact; Provided informative and helpful answers to questions; Signficant give and take with audience members |
Holistic Rubric Example
| Scale |
|---|
| 1- Unacceptable Overall did not deliver a substantive or organized presentation and did not engage with the audience |
| 2- Needs Improvement Overall delivered a presentation with minimal substance and organiation and rarely engaged with the audience |
| 3- Accepateble Overall, delivered an adequate presentation with substance and organization and sufficiently engaged with the audience |
| 4- Exemplary Overall, delivered an excellent, well-organized presentation with substance and significantly engaged with the audience |