Strategy 3: Collaborating on assessment criteria
- Katrina Casey Kosyk, Miss
- Rachel Hall
- Donna Wong
Collaborating on assessment criteria is a feed up strategy whereby students collaborate with the instructor and perhaps amongst each other to develop assessment criteria, either in part or in whole. This strategy is used instead of the instructor providing students with a fixed set of criteria for their writing assignments.
In this article:
Why have students collaborate on developing or refining assessment criteria?
This feed up strategy serves to:
Clarify assignment expectations: Instructors’ and students’ interpretations of assignment requirements do not always match[1][2] and assignment expectations vary from instructor to instructor. For these reasons, involving students in refining or defining assessment criteria raises their awareness of what the expectations are for writing assignments in your course and can promote a deeper understanding of your expectations.[3]
Clarify the language that describes the criteria: Language used to describe assignments and assessment criteria can be opaque to students.[4] Descriptions of performance standards such as “demonstrates logical and subtle sequencing of ideas” may not help students meet the criteria if they do not understand what “subtle sequencing” means or if they interpret the phrase differently from the way their instructor does.
Empower students: Involving students in co-creating assessment criteria gives them a stake in their work. It also helps them talk about writing and their understanding of disciplinary conventions.[5][6]
How can this strategy be implemented?
Gather examples of student writing: Students benefit from seeing the extent to which other students’ work meets assignment criteria. In addition, allowing students to apply their criteria to example assignments can foster their understanding of the desired goal/target and develop their awareness of what to aim for when they write their own assignments. To gather examples, invite former students to share their assignments so that you can use as them as examples; anonymity should be guaranteed. Email template for soliciting examples of student work at end of term:
If obtaining examples from former students is not feasible, you might find examples on the internet or in writing textbooks. In the case of short writing assignments, you can also write your own examples.
Plan according to context: The number of students in your class, the year they are in, and the physical classroom setting may influence how you implement this strategy. For example, a large number of students may need more in-class time for discussion than a small number of students, first-year students may need more guidance than third-year students, and classrooms where it is difficult to move chairs into small groups for discussion may pose a challenge. Consider having students work in small groups asynchronously online to address time and physical classroom constraints.
Examples
We offer examples of how to implement the strategy and an example of student-translated performance standards.
Translating rubric language
This example is adapted from Brookhart (pp. 96-97).[7]
Preparation
Prepare to distribute assignment instructions, rubric, and examples of student writing at the same time. Both the instructions and the rubric can be distributed to students in class or made available to them in myCourses.
Procedure
Provide students with the detailed rubric and a blank rubric template on paper or online that they will fill in.
Individually, students “translate” (i.e., rewrite) all or selected portions of the performance standards identified in the detailed rubric (see the Student-translated descriptions of performance standards rubric below).
In pairs, students explain their translations to each other and decide on a single, final version.
Still in pairs, students use their translated rubric to assess an example of student writing. They should note any questions.
Provide an opportunity for a whole class discussion of the criteria so that questions can be addressed and a common understanding can be agreed upon. An alternative to a whole class discussion is to have students submit their translated rubrics to a myCourses discussion forum where you or TAs address questions. In either case, post a final version of the rubric written with students’ translations to myCourses before students begin the writing assignment.
Note that myCourses has a rubrics tool.
Student-translated descriptions of performance standards
Criteria | Instructors’ descriptions of performance standards | Student-translated description of performance standards |
|---|---|---|
Organization - structural development of idea | Writer demonstrates logical and subtle sequencing of ideas through well-developed paragraphs; sentences are not convoluted; transitions are used to enhance organization. (Excerpt from Research Paper Rubric, n.d.)[8] | Each paragraph develops an idea. Words and phrases that signal a change to a new idea are included to help readers follow along. |
Content | Balanced presentation of relevant and legitimate information that clearly supports a central purpose or argument and shows a thoughtful, in-depth analysis of a significant topic. Reader gains important insights. (Excerpt from Rubric for Research Paper, n.d.)[8] | An argument is made. By including relevant and specific evidence, readers will see that the argument has been explored in depth. Writing holds the readers’ attention. |
Read more:
Rubrics: The basics (TL KB article)
Co-constructing assessment criteria from scratch
This example is adapted from Fraile, Panadero, and Pardo (p. 72).[9]
Preparation
Have at hand instructions for a writing assignment, such as a research paper, that students will be asked to submit.
Procedure
Individually, students read the assignment instructions.
Working in small groups, students brainstorm characteristics of a quality research paper and put them into categories, which they label. These categories become the criteria for the research paper.
Groups share their respective lists of criteria aloud and the instructor writes them on the board. Guided by the instructor, students discuss the criteria on the board and work toward reducing the list to a manageable number for the assignment.
The criteria are divided among the groups (more than one group can work on a criterion). Students spend 10 minutes developing descriptions of the two extreme performance standards (i.e., “excellent” and “poor”).
Students form new groups such that each new group has one student who has worked on a given criterion (jigsaw style grouping). Students share their descriptions and further refine them until consensus is reached within each group—which may require instructor help.
At the end of class, students submit the final descriptions.
The instructor combines students’ contributions to produce a final list of assessment criteria for that assignment. (While some editing may be required, students’ own words should be used as much as possible.)
In the following class, the instructor solicits students’ approval of the final version of the list.
Variations
Ask students to address only a portion of the assessment criteria. Some examples to try:
Hand out criteria and have students write descriptions.
Provide students with criteria and descriptions for mechanics and formatting, and assign students the task of articulating the criteria and descriptions for content.
More examples of engaging students in a collaborative approach to writing assessment criteria can be found in Brookhart[7] and Godbee.[5]
[1] Maclellan, E. (2001). Assessment for learning: The differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 307-318.
[2] Rust, C., Price, M., & O’Donovan, B. (2003). Improving students’ learning by developing their understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(2), 147-164.
[3] Carless, D. (2006). Differing perception of the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219-233.
[4] Chanock, K. (2000). Comments on essays: Do students understand what tutors write? Teaching in Higher Education, 5(1), 95-105.
[5] 1 2 Godbee, B. (2017). Student-generated evaluation criteria. Writing Across the Curriculum, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
[6] Meer, N., & Chapman, A. (2015). Co-creation of marking criteria: Students as partners in the assessment process. Business and Management Education in HE, 1-15.
[7] 1 2 Brookhart, S. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASCD.
[8] 1 2 Research paper rubric. (n.d.). Center for Teaching Excellence. University of Florida. Retrieved July 21, 2023.
[9] Fraile, J., Panadero, E., & Pardo, R. (2017). Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 69-76.