An Effective Rubric Norming Process

Autor/inn/en	Schoepp, Kevin; Danaher, Maurice; Kranov, Ashley Ater
Titel	An Effective Rubric Norming Process
Quelle	In: Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 23 (2018) 11, (12 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1531-7714
Schlagwörter	Scoring Rubrics; Norms; Higher Education; Methods; College Faculty; Teacher Collaboration + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Scoring formulas; Auswertungsbogen; Normwert; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; Method; Methode; Fakultät; Lehrerkooperation
Abstract	Within higher education, rubric use is expanding. Whereas some years ago the topic of rubrics may have been of interest only to faculty in colleges of education, in recent years the focus on teaching and learning and the emphasis from accrediting bodies has elevated the importance of rubrics across disciplines and different types of assessment. One of the key aspects to successful implementation of a shared rubric is the process known as norming, calibrating, or moderating rubrics, an oft-neglected area in rubric literature. Norming should be a collaborative process built around knowledge of the rubric and meaningful discussion leading to evidence-driven consensus, but actual examples of norming are rarely available to university faculty. This paper describes the steps involved in a successful consensus-driven norming process in higher education using one particular rubric, the Computing Professional Skills Assessment (CPSA). The steps are: 1) document preparation; 2) rubric review; 3) initial reading and scoring of one learning outcome; 4) initial sharing/recording of results; 5) initial consensus development and adjusting of results; 6) initial reading and scoring of remaining learning outcomes; 7) reading and scoring of remaining transcripts; 8) sharing/recording results; 9) development of consensus and adjusting of results. This norming process, though used for the CPSA, is transferable to other rubrics where faculty have come together to collaborate on grading a shared assignment. It is most appropriate for higher education where, more often than not, faculty independence requires consensus over directive. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Dr. Lawrence M. Rudner. e-mail: editor@pareonline.net; Web site: http://pareonline.net
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01