Using rubrics - The letter grade on steroids

In my last post, I began discussing alternatives to the standard letter grade and mostly wrote about using narratives for evaluating work. Tonight, I'd like to discuss the use of criteria and grading rubrics.

Criterion-based grading, for me, is a large improvement on the standard math teacher grading system (i.e. add up points earned and divide by points possible to get a percentage that converts to a letter). I use criterion-based grading exclusively in my Senior Stats course. Here is an example of grading rubric I used this year.

Here is how I use my rubric. I read through the project as a whole, making notes and comments as I go. I then evaluate each criterion, one by one. Each criterion has various achievement levels. Some go from 0 to 2, others from 0 to 4. In order to reach a level 2, a project must satisfy all of levels 1 and 2. To reach level 3, a project must satisfy all the requirements of all 3 descriptions.

I attempt to write the descriptions as plainly as possible and in a logical progression so that attaining a higher level should show an improved understanding. For example, take my "Displays" criterion. To reach level 1, a student must only create one correct display that is relevant to the project topic. Level 2 is attained if a student makes multiple types of displays. So making 2 different histograms would be insufficient. Making a histogram and a boxplot would satisfy the description. In each case, the displays must be made "correctly," meaning, in part, that they should be accurate and be labeled sufficiently. To reach level 3, the displays must "communicate well" and have a "high level of accuracy." Essentially, this is a way for me to distinguish between the student that makes a few sloppy displays and the student who makes a few excellent displays. Finally, level 4 requires a certain degree of sophistication within the displays. This means that they are all effective and lead to insightful analysis. There is a level of complexity within the displays.

So, I evaluate the project against all of the criteria. I write narrative comments for each criterion to explain why a certain level was awarded. I note errors as well as strengths. This example will give you a taste of what I try to do each time (you can zoom in on the image to make it large enough to read).

In the end, however, by using achievement levels, what I've really done is assign a variety of grades to a project. In a sense, I've given a student a "letter" grade for their introduction, another for their data, one for their calculations, and so on. So, I feel like I'm not exactly moving away from the letter grade entirely. And, given where I teach, in the end, I do have to assign an actual letter grade to the project. So, I do my voodoo and do that. More on my voodoo in another post. I'm tired. Good night.