You are here:

Rubric Marking “Out of the Box”: Saving Time & Adding Value to Teaching & Learning
PROCEEDINGS

, , , The University of Auckland Business School, New Zealand

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Lisbon, Portugal ISBN 978-1-880094-89-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

Abstract: This paper describes how Goggle Docs can be used to create a rubric marking system with ‘out-of-the-box’ features a simple form with radio buttons or Likert scale to record the student’s marks for each assessment item, and the total marks. Comments are optional. The data can be exported as a spread sheet that is suitable for uploading to an LMS or sending out by email to the students. In this study our hypothesis that it takes less time using rubrics was supported.. The data recorded within the Google Docs application was a ‘bonus’ and analysed. The paper discusses visualisation of the rubrics using Google Analytics ‘off-the-shelf’ and the possibility of further analysis such as inter-rater reliability and item response theory.

Citation

Gardner, L., Sheridan, D. & Andreas, N. (2011). Rubric Marking “Out of the Box”: Saving Time & Adding Value to Teaching & Learning. In T. Bastiaens & M. Ebner (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2011--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 391-400). Lisbon, Portugal: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 27, 2021 from .

© 2011 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Ahoniemi, T., & Karavirta, V. (2009). Analyzing the use of a rubric-based grading tool. In Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 333-337). Paris,
  2. Anglin, L., Anglin, K., Schumann, P.L., & Kaliski, J.A. (2008). Improving the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Grading Through the Use of Computer-Assisted Grading Rubrics. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 6(1), 51-73.
  3. Boettger, R. (2010). Rubric Use in Technical Communication: Exploring the Process of Creating Valid and Reliable Assessment Tools. Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions on, 53(1), 4-17.
  4. Campbell, A. (2005). Application of ICT-and rubrics to the assessment process where professional judgement is involved: the features of an e-marking tool. Assessment& Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(5), 529-537.
  5. Cooper, B.S., & Gargan, A. (2009). Rubrics in Education. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(1), 54-55.
  6. Easton, L.B. (2007). Walking Our Talk about Standards. Phi Delta Kappan, 88(5), 391-394.
  7. Hamer, J., Kell, C., & Spence, F. (2007). Peer assessment using Arop ä. In Proceeding ACE '07 Proceedings of the
  8. Jonsson, A. (2010). The use of transparency in the‘ Interactive examination’ for student teachers. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy& Practice, 17(2), 183-197.
  9. Luxton-Reilly, A. (2009). A systematic review of tools that support peer assessment. Computer Science Education, 19(4), 209-232.
  10. McCann, A.L. (2009). Factors affecting the adoption of an e-assessment system. Assessment& Evaluation in Higher Education.
  11. Milne, J., Heinrich, E., & Morrison, D. (2008). Technological support for assignment assessment: A New Zealand higher education survey. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(5), 487-504.
  12. Nelson, L. (2010). An exchange of emails discussing the appropriateness of an IRT or IA in the context of a rubric marking system. Http://lertap.curtin.edu.au/Contactus.htm
  13. Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 218, 199.
  14. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Glazewski, K.D., Newby, T.J., & Ertmer, P.A. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers& Education, 55(3), 1321-1335.
  15. Reddy, Y.M., & Andrade, H. (2009). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment& Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 435-448.
  16. Sadler, D.R. (2009). Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading. Assessment& Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 159-179.
  17. Sadler, R.D. (2005). Interpretations of criteria-based assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment& Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 175-194.
  18. Tractenberg, R.E., Umans, J.G., & McCarter, R.J. (2009). A Mastery Rubric: guiding curriculum design, admissions and development of course objectives. Assessment& Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(1), 15-32.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Slides

Also Read

Related Collections