Rubrics are widely used in education, especially in language classrooms, where teachers and administrators face the challenge of assessing a complex task—students’ language performance. Rubrics help ensure that decisions about language learning are valid, reliable, and fair. They also allow scoring demands to be distributed across different people while maintaining consistency. Rubrics center and standardize judgments. In short, rubrics are valuable, but, as you may already know, not all rubrics are equally effective.
Click here to download our Rubric Evaluation & Improvement Checklist.
Instead of revisiting “why rubrics are necessary,” this post aims to help you recognize when a rubric is off and know how to fix it. If you’re not in a position to change a rubric, you’ll feel more confident offering sound suggestions.
First, what are the costs of a subpar rubric? Imagine the mayhem you could cause if you went to a construction site and swapped out a few of the workers’ standard measuring tapes for decoys, all of which looked the same but were stretched or shortened. The printing on each deceives; for though all say, they measure in feet—for some a foot is actually 10 inches and for others it’s 14.
Would that project get completed, let alone on time and within budget? Can you imagine being the general contractor when cabinets and countertops arrive, only to realize you’ve unknowingly introduced such a level of error? If you’re thinking that rubrics gone awry couldn’t be that bad, you’re right; it’d be worse. Measuring tapes are at least a fixed and consistent measure, so even if wrong, they would be ‘wrong’ in the same way every time. By contrast, rubrics intend to guide human perception, which is far less consistent from one person to the next (and even the same person from one day to the next).
For our work in the language classroom to be the best that it can be, our measurement needs to be the best that it can be. Given that rubrics are at the heart of our measurement, how do we know when they aren’t performing well and what could we do to make them better? Keep reading to find out.
- If you aren’t the one using the rubric the most, talk to those who are. Even if they can’t articulate precisely what’s wrong, their feedback is valuable. If they feel the rubric is making their job harder, it’s worth exploring why.
- Any human scoring process is going to require maintenance to remain at its peak performance; however, the difficulty in getting and keeping a scoring team aligned is a good indicator whether the rubric (which is the lynch pin for achieving alignment) may need work.
- Another clue comes from the data generated by the rubric. If a graph of data from using your rubric shows sharp spikes or unusual dips, it could indicate that the rubric is unwell. You can cross-check by comparing the rubric’s data with results from a standardized test like WIDA ACCESS. While data plots from both may not be exactly the same, they also shouldn’t be completely different if they intend to measure the same underlying skill.
- The language in a rubric plays a crucial role in shaping perceptions and ensuring consistency. Clear, concise descriptions unify users’ interpretations, but vague or overly complex language can confuse. More words in a description increase the chance of varying interpretations. Significant imbalances in word count between levels can lead to scoring errors. Simple word analyses can often bring fresh insights and help clarify performance expectations.
So you’ve gone through these steps and see that a rubric refresh is in the best interest of its users – both those assigning scores (often teachers) and those receiving the score detail (students, parents, and administrators). Now what?
1. Create a rubric work space.
Breaking the language out of its current document design can help you see it in new ways. Some may find it helpful to use a white board and sticky notes or a digital whiteboard solution, allowing you to move different parts of the description around. Sticky notes also encourage you to be more direct and concise in your descriptions.
2. Focus on the progression of skills, or “throughlines.”
By putting the rubric into a flexible format, you can examine how skill levels progress from one to the next. Rubrics often present levels in columns and performance categories in rows. Ideally, each level should clearly differentiate how a student’s performance increases with each step.
3. Check for redundancy in performance categories.
Rubrics often break down performance into areas like fluency, pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary. A common mistake is using the same or very similar descriptions in multiple categories. Avoid overlap by choosing the most appropriate category for each criteria.
4. Mind your Words.
Language evaluation is nuanced, and certain words can have different meanings for different users. For example, “fluently” might be interpreted as speaking like a native speaker, but in a technical sense, it refers to speaking without pauses or fillers. Be mindful of how your word choices impact clarity and introduce complexity.
Consider using tools like LexTutor’s VocabProfiler to analyze the vocabulary in your rubric. This tool color-codes words based on their frequency, helping you identify where you may have introduced overly advanced or technical terms. Simplifying the language can make the rubric more accessible, especially for non-native users.
After updating your rubric, pilot it and compare the results with the previous version. Gather feedback. Compare the word analysis details from before and after the revisions. Look for how the rubric is more balanced and even in its descriptions. Expect that it will take a few iterations to fully optimize any rubric. Be patient, but stay persistently curious.
If you’d like to hear more specifics about a recent rubric improvement project we led here at Flashlight Learning, reach out. We’d love to further the conversation.
Judson Hart
Judson Hart is passionate about enhancing language learning and teaching through technology and assessment. Before joining Flashlight learning as the Director of Research and Development, he spent time at both large and small educational technology companies working on solutions related to automated language testing. His career began at Brigham Young University where he supervised the testing and technology components of their TESOL lab school.