Caution: Wordiness Dilutes Attention

How often do we ask students about their perceptions of conventional rubrics? How did we know they contribute or not to engagement? Do we ask them how we might improve the working of rubrics or how they interpret the distinctions between qualifier levels of assessment? Do they feel the use of the rubrics tool is a fair assessment of their work? Are they able to first assess their work and consult with the teacher to discuss how to improve their work?

When I have asked students of all ages about rubrics, many roll their eyes first before indicating that they read the box the teacher has checked, after the work is completed. Even though many have been seated while the description of how work will be assessed using the rubric, prior to the start of an assignment or project, many students are overloaded with the vast 'delivery' of information, and sit patiently often with a glossy gaze at the clock. In many ways they go through the motions, and rely on the teacher and other instructional material to guide their work.

Just as teachers have little time to read massive volumes of government documents, students do not have time to grapple with assessment tools. With so much work assigned and so much content to be 'delivered', most students pay little attention to the rubrics tool that often serves as a summative evaluation.

We know that we would not want our students to repeat words in a piece of writing, yet the writing they see often modeled in rubrics is full of weak writing samples. As educators are we encouraged to sit down and improve upon the commercial rubric masters? What evidence do we have that these (made by others) tools support learning?

The single-point rubrics are on the right track. Students can, focus on the expectations, not the tedious over-engineering of the levels of weak, developing and poor descriptions of work. I like to collapse such less than proficient assessments as "not yet", which means the expectations do not disappear with a lower grade. Rather the student must return to the work, emulating what happens in the work force, in essence, to revise it to meet at least a proficient standard. By accepting poor performance and work, we are widening the learning gap, when we let all students move on to the next assignment. Rubrics should not leave learners behind; they should inspire learners to improve and do their best.

Rubrics do not have to be fixed; they can be interactive with self-assessment built in way before a teacher lays eyes on the work. Rubrics can inspire creativity, be rigorous and include positive language. How often do you read words and phrases on rubrics (on the left hand side of the page) that make you cringe? Rubrics can be a tool for communication and a tool for learning, but this cannot happen in absence of the teacher. The wisdom of each educator in the classroom should not be separate from assessment; they should be a key agent in their construction. Students can also learn to be creators of rubrics and designers of assessment tools. In this way we can learn from not only their use but their creations.