rubrics for reflective essay writing

Center for Excellence in Teaching

Home > Resources > Reflective essay rubric

Reflective essay rubric

This is a grading rubric an instructor uses to assess students’ work on this type of assignment. It is a sample rubric that needs to be edited to reflect the specifics of a particular assignment. Students can self-assess using the rubric as a checklist before submitting their assignment. 

Download this file

Download this file [61.94 KB]

Back to Resources Page

Reflective Essay Rubric

Category	Exceeds Standard	Meets Standard	Nearly Meets Standard	Does Not Meet Standard	No Evidence	Score
Reflect personal learning stretch in Science Project	Shows great depth of knowledge and learning, reveals feelings and thoughts, abstract ideas reflected through use of specific details.	Relates learning with research and project, personal and general reflections included, uses concrete language.	Does not go deeply into the reflection of learning, generalizations and limited insight, uses some detail.	Little or no explanation or reflection on learning, no or few details to support reflection.	Shows no evidence of learning or reflection.
Organization-Structural Development of the Idea	Writer demonstrates logical and subtle sequencing of ideas through well- developed paragraphs; transitions are used to enhance organization.	Paragraph development present but not perfected.	Logical organization; organization of ideas not fully developed.	No evidence of structure or organization.
Conclusion	The conclusion is engaging and restates personal learning.	The conclusion restates the learning.	The conclusion does not adequately restate the learning.	Incomplete and/or unfocused.
Mechanics	No errors in punctuation, capitalization and spelling.	Almost no errors in punctuation, capitalization and spelling.	Many errors in punctuation, capitalization and spelling.	Numerous and distracting errors in punctuation, capitalization and spelling.	Not applicable
Usage	No errors in sentence structure and word usage.	Almost no errors in sentence structure and word usage.	Many errors in sentence structure and word usage.	Numerous and distracting errors in sentence structure and word usage.	Not applicable

Mailing Address

Pomona College 333 N. College Way Claremont , CA 91711

Get in touch

Give back to pomona.

Part of   The Claremont Colleges

• Library Guides
• IRWC Interactive Rubric for Written Communication
• Interactive Rubric for Written Communication
• Reflective Essay

Interactive Rubric for Written Communication: Reflective Essay

• Introduction
• 1.2. Thesis
• 1.3. Context
• 1.4. Audience
• 2.1. Information & Data
• 2.2. Conceptual Knowledge
• 2.3. Examples & Illustrations
• 2.4. Sources
• 2.4.1. Relevance
• 2.4.2. Authority
• 3.2. Evidence
• 3.3. Specificity
• 3.4. Creativity
• 3.5. Criticality
• 3.6. Reflexivity
• 3.7. Evaluation
• 4.1. Section
• 4.2. Paragraph
• 4.3. Sequence
• 4.4. Cohesive Ties
• 5.1. Clarity
• 5.2.1. Mood
• 5.2.2. Mode
• 5.2.3. Narrative Form
• 5.2.4. Voice (Active/Passive)
• 5.4. Vocabulary
• 5.4.1. Academic Vocabulary
• 5.4.2. Technical Vocabulary
• 5.4.3. Inclusive Language
• 5.5. Literary Devices
• 5.6. Referencing
• 5.6.1. Citations
• 5.6.2. Reference List
• 5.6.3. Quotations
• 5.6.4. Application
• 5.6.5. Paraphrasing & Plagiarism
• 5.7. Formatting
• 5.7.1. Font
• 5.7.2. Spacing
• 5.8. Length
• 6.1. Sentences
• 6.1.1. Fragments
• 6.1.2. Run-on Sentences
• 6.1.3. Agreement
• 6.2. Word Classes
• 6.2.1. Pronouns
• 6.2.2. Prepositions
• 6.2.3. Articles
• 6.2.4. Conjunctions
• 7.1. Spelling
• 7.2. Punctuation
• 7.2.1. Apostrophes
• 7.2.2. Full Stops
• 7.2.3. Capitalisation
• 7.2.4. Quotation Marks
• 7.2.5. Commas & Colons
• 7.2.6. Abbreviations
• 7.2.7. Other (e.g., Hyphens)
• 7.3. Editing
• Persuasive Essay
• For Lecturers

1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 1.5.
2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 2.4.1. 2.4.2.
3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. 3.6. 3.7.
4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4.
5.1. 5.2. 5.2.1. 5.2.2. 5.2.3. 5.2.4. 5.3. 5.4. 5.4.1. 5.4.2. 5.4.3. 5.5. 5.6. 5.6.1. 5.6.2. 5.6.3. 5.6.4. 5.6.5. 5.7. 5.7.1. 5.7.2. 5.8.
6.1. 6.1.1. 6.1.2. 6.1.3. 6.2. 6.2.1. 6.2.2. 6.2.3. 6.2.4.	NTAX
7.1. 7.2. 7.2.1. 7.2.2. 7.2.3. 7.2.4. 7.2.5. 7.2.6. 7.2.7. 7.3.

Reflective essays

Genre: A reflective essay reflects critically on personal experience and opinion in light of broader literature, theories or subject materials. As conventions and expectations may differ across contexts, always check with your lecturer for the specific conventions of the genre.

Context: This short reflective essay and reply was written in response to a weekly assessment task in an atypical development unit that required students to reflect on their own position in relation the following question :

Do Barbie Dolls affect girls' body image? If you had (or have) a young daughter, would you allow her to play with Barbie or Bratz dolls? Why or why not?

Reflective essay example 

Response: Barbie Dolls and Body Image: Just Child’s Play? This title links to the topic of the writing and raises a question that implies a thesis .

• << Previous: Persuasive Essay
• Next: For Lecturers >>
• Last Updated: Sep 5, 2024 12:07 PM
• URL: https://libguides.jcu.edu.au/irwc

• Schools & departments

Assessment rubrics

Rubrics allow for quicker and more consistent marking. This can be extremely helpful in reflection, which can feel as if it needs to be assessed by instinct alone. A well-defined rubric will make marking of reflection systematic and support both you and the reflectors.

Rubric	A tool to help in assessing students’ work, which usually includes three essential features: evaluative criteria, quality definitions of the criteria at particular levels, and a scoring strategy (Dawson, 2007)
Holistic rubric	For every grade level or mark, gives an overall description of competence, without a breakdown into individual criteria.
Analytic rubric	For every grade level or mark, describes the level of competence for each assessment criterion.

Rubrics make life easier for the reflectors and for you as a marker

There are many general benefits from using a rubric, which extend beyond reflection. For facilitators a rubric can:

• help ensure consistency in the grades given
• reduce uncertainty which may come with grading
• reduce time spent grading
• identify clear strengths and weaknesses in work and therefore make feedback easier

Moreover, students report that having a well-defined rubric available before they engage with an assessment makes it clearer what is expected of them. Other benefits can be:

• More measurable feedback
• Students can more easily identify specific areas which they need to work on

Sometimes student work can fall outside the scope of a rubric – however a rubric will give you a place to start

While the usefulness of rubrics are widely accepted, there are some criticisms arguing that rubrics can fail to make the marking easier as students’ work does not fit onto the predefined categories and will have to be assessed holistically, rather than by a set of components. Moreover, it is argued that a piece of work is often more than the sum of its parts.

These are both fair criticisms. Sometimes you will receive reflections that are hard to mark against your criteria or are indeed better than your rubric would suggest. However, having a rubric will give you a place to start for these reflections.

If you find that your rubric consistently misses aspects this would suggest the criteria need updated.

Choose a holistic or analytic rubric – the analytic will make the benefits more pronounced

When choosing your rubric, there are two general approaches: holistic and analytical.

For each level of performance highlighted in the rubrics, it can be helpful to provide an example of that level (for example a series of reflective sentences or an extract).

Holistic rubrics are general levels of performance

The holistic rubric gives a general description of the different performance levels, for example novice, apprentice, proficient, or distinguished.

The levels can take many different names, and you can choose as many levels as you find appropriate. It can be recommended to include the same number of levels as the number of grades available for students, for example a level for failing and a level for each passing grade.

Analytic rubrics take into account performance on each assessment criterion

The analytic rubric allows you to identify a reflector’s performance against each of your chosen and well-defined assessment criteria.

This can be helpful for you in the marking process and when giving feedback to the reflector as you can tell them exactly what areas they are performing well in and need to improve on.

You may consider giving a student a mark for each criterion and take an average of that for the overall mark. Alternatively, predefine a weight or a set of points available for each criterion and calculate the overall mark according to this. If the latter method is used, you should also make the weightings available to students at the same time as the rubric.

Test your reflective rubric and improve it

It is unlikely that the first rubric you make is going to capture everything you need, and you may find you need to update it. This is natural for rubrics in all areas, and especially around the area of reflection, which for many is new.  Revisiting your rubric is particularly worth doing after the first time it is used.

When using your rubric you can ask yourself:

• What does this rubric make easier about marking and/or feedback (if anything)?
• What is still challenging when I am using this rubric?
• Are there clear gaps in my identified criteria or rubric which I now see are needed for what I consider essential in the assignment?
• What do I need to change (if anything)?
• How do students seem to react to my rubric?

Test if others would give students the same marks with your rubric

Rubrics that work well for you have a lot of value, but to ensure that you get an optimal rubric it is important that others using your rubric would give the same grade to the same reflection as you do – ensuring that your rubric has inter-rater reliability.

This is important for two reasons:

• It reinforces the validity of your rubric and ensures that, if there are multiple markers for your reflective assessments, the grade does not vary by which person is marking
• It ensures that students who see the rubric will be able to accurately produce work according to the level they are striving towards.

Holistic rubrics

Moon’s (2004) four levels of reflective writing.

These four levels distinguish between four types of written accounts you might see a reflector produce.

In this case the three top levels might pass a reflective assignment, where descriptive writing would not.

Taken from Jennifer Moon’s book: A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning (2004)

Descriptive writing	This account is descriptive and it contains little reflection.  It may tell a story but from one point of view at a time and generally one point at a time is made.  Ideas tend to be linked by the sequence of the account / story rather than by meaning.  The account describes what happened, sometimes mentioning past experiences, sometimes anticipating the future – but all in the context of an account of the event.  There may be references to emotional reactions but they are not explored and not related to behaviour. The account may relate to ideas or external information, but these are not considered or questioned and the possible impact on behaviour or the meaning of events is not mentioned. There is little attempt to focus on particular issues.  Most points are made with similar weight. The writing could hardly be deemed to be reflective at all. It could be a reasonably written account of an event that would serve as a basis on which reflection might start, though a good description that precedes reflective accounts will tend to be more focused and to signal points and issues for further reflection.
Descriptive account with some reflection	This is a descriptive account that signals points for reflection while not actually showing much reflection. The basic account is descriptive in the manner of description above.  There is little addition of ideas from outside the event, reference to alternative viewpoints or attitudes to others, comment and so on.  However, the account is more than just a story.  It is focused on the event as if there is a big question or there are questions to be asked and answered.  Points on which reflection could occur are signalled.  There is recognition of the worth of further exploring but it does not go very far.  In other words, asking the questions makes it more than a descriptive account, but the lack of attempt to respond to the questions means that there is little actual analysis of the events. The questioning does begin to suggest a ‘standing back from the event’ in (usually) isolated areas of the account. The account may mention emotional reactions, or be influenced by emotion.  Any influence may be noted, and possibly questioned. There is a sense of recognition that this is an incident from which learning can be gained, but the reflection does not go sufficiently deep to enable the learning to begin to occur.
Reflective writing (level 1)	There is description but it is focused with particular aspects accentuated for reflective comment.  There may be a sense that the material is being mulled around.  It is no longer a straight-forward account of an event, but it is definitely reflective. There is evidence of external ideas or information and where this occurs, the material is subjected to reflection.  The account shows some analysis and there is recognition of the worth of exploring motives or reasons for behaviour Where relevant, there is willingness to be critical of the action of self or others.  There is likely to be some self-questioning and willingness also to recognise the overall effect of the event on self.  In other words, there is some ‘standing back’ from the event.  There is recognition of any emotional content, a questioning of its role and influence and an attempt to consider its significance in shaping the views presented. There may be recognition that things might look different from other perspectives that views can change with time or the emotional state.  The existence of several alternative points of view may be acknowledged but not analysed. In other words, in a relatively limited way the account may recognise that frames of reference affect the manner in which we reflect at a given time but it does not deal with this in a way that links it effectively to issues about the quality of personal judgement.
Reflective writing (level 2)	Description now only serves the process of reflection, covering the issues for reflection and noting their context.  There is clear evidence of standing back from an event and there is mulling over and internal dialogue. The account shows deep reflection, and it incorporates a recognition that the frame of reference with which an event is viewed can change. A metacognitive stance is taken (i.e. critical awareness of one’s own processes of mental functioning – including reflection). The account probably recognises that events exist in a historical or social context that may be influential on a person’s reaction to them.  In other words, multiple perspectives are noted. Self-questioning is evident (an ‘internal dialogue’ is set up at times) deliberating between different views of personal behaviour and that of others. The view and motives of others are taken into account and considered against those of the writer. There is recognition of the role of emotion in shaping the ideas and recognition of the manner in which different emotional influences can frame the account in different ways. There is recognition that prior experience, thoughts (own and other’s) interact with the production of current behaviour. There is observation that there is learning to be gained from the experience and points for learning are noted. There is recognition that the personal frame of reference can change according to the emotional state in which it is written, the acquisition of new information, the review of ideas and the effect of time passing.

Reflective writing rubric

These four levels are different and highlight four alternative approaches to reflective journaling. While they are specifically developed for journal use, the levels will generalise to other types of written reflection.

The rubric is develop by Chabon and Lee-Wilkerson (2006) when evaluating reflective journals of students undertaking a graduate degree in communication sciences and disorders.

Level 1: Descriptive	Students demonstrate acquisition of new content from significant learning experiences. Journal entry provides evidence of gaining knowledge, making sense of new experiences, or making linkages between old and new information.	“I didn’t know that many of the traditions I believed were based in Anglo-American roots. I thought that all cultures viewed traditions similarly.”
Level 2: Empathetic	Students demonstrate thoughts about or challenges to beliefs, values, and attitudes of self and others. Journal entry provides examples of self-projection into the experiences of other, sensitivity towards the values and beliefs of others, and/or tolerance for differences.	“I felt badly when I heard the derogatory terms used so freely when I visited the South.”
Level 3: Analytic	Students demonstrate the application of learning to a broader context of personal and professional life. Journal entry provides evidence of student’s use of readings, observations, and discussions to examine, appraise, compare, contrast, plan for new actions or response, or propose remedies to use in and outside structured learning experiences.	“I was able to observe nursing staff interact with a patient whose first language was Tagalog and was diagnosed with altered mental status. The nurses employed many of the strategies that we have read about and discussed in class.”
Level 4: Metacognitive	Students demonstrate examination of the learning process, showing what learning occurred, how learning occurred, and how newly acquired knowledge or learning altered existing knowledge. Journal entry provides examples of evaluation or revision of real and fictitious interactions.	“I found myself forming impressions about a child’s language abilities and made myself stop until I got additional information as suggested in class discussions.”

Analytical rubric

Reflection evaluation for learners’ enhanced competencies tool (reflect) rubric.

This analytic rubric has been developed and empirically tested and improved by Wald et al. (2012). It was developed specifically for medical education, but can easily be used elsewhere. The rubric is designed using theoretical considerations from a range of thinkers around reflection as Moon, Schön, Boud and Mezirow.

This rubric has been used in empirical studies and a high inter-rater reliability has been established.

There are two components to the rubric. The standard rubric and an additional axis. The second axis should be used when a reflector reaches ‘Critical reflection’ and then distinguishes between two types of learning, which reflection can help surface.

Adding the additional axis can help you to differentiate between what kind of learning the student has obtained as well as reminding us that reflection does not need to always create new practice – becoming aware of why one’s practice works can be equally valuable.

Standard Rubric

	Superficial descriptive writing approach (fact reporting, vague impressions) without reflection or introspection	Elaborated descriptive writing approach and impressions without reflection	Movement beyond reporting or descriptive writing to reflecting (i.e. attempting to understand, question, or analyse the event)	Exploration and critique of assumptions, values, beliefs, and/or biases, and the consequences of action (present and future)
	Sense of writer being partially present	Sense of writer being partially present	Sense of writer being largely or fully present	Sense of writer being fully present
	No description of the disorienting dilemma, conflict, challenge, or issue of concern	Absent or weak description of the disorienting dilemma, conflict, challenge, or issue of concern	Description of the disorienting dilemma, conflict, challenge, or issue of concern	Full description of the disorienting dilemma, conflict, challenge, or issue of concern that includes multiple perspectives, exploring alternative explanations, and challenging assumptions
	Little or no recognition or attention to emotions	Recognition but no exploration or attention to emotions	Recognition, exploration, and attention to emotions	Recognition, exploration, attention to emotions, and gain of emotional insight
	No analysis or meaning making	Little or unclear analysis or meaning making	Some analysis and meaning making	Comprehensive analysis and meaning making
	Poorly addresses the assignment question and does not provide a compelling rationale for choosing an alternative	Partial or unclear addressing of assignment question; does not provide a compelling rationale for choosing an alternative	Clearly answers the assignment question or, if relevant, provides a compelling rationale for choosing an alternative	Clearly answers the assignment question or, if relevant provides a compelling rationale for choosing an alternative

Axis II for critical reflection

Frames of reference or meaning structures are transformed. Requires critical reflection integration of new learning into one’s identity, informing future perceptions, emotions, attitudes, insights, meanings, and actions. Conveys a clear sense of a breakthrough.	Frames of reference or meaning structures are confirmed. Requires critical reflection.

Rubric for reflection using different criteria

This rubric form Jones (n.d) gives another approach to marking reflection. Using five criteria it manages to capture a lot of what is relevant when marking reflection as well as giving clear qualities highlighted for each level of reflection.

\
	Language is unclear and confusing throughout. Concepts are either not discussed or are presented inaccurately.	There are frequent lapses in clarity and accuracy	Minor, infrequent lapses in clarity and accuracy.	The language is clear and expressive. The reader can create a mental picture of the situation being described. Abstract concepts are explained accurately. Explanation of concepts makes sense to an uninformed reader.
	Most of the reflection is irrelevant to student and/or course learning goals.	Student makes attempts to demonstrate relevance, but the relevance is unclear to the reader.	The learning experience being reflected upon is relevant and meaningful to student and course learning goals.	The learning experience being reflected upon is relevant and meaningful to student and course learning goals.
	Reflection does not move beyond description of the learning experience(s).	Student makes attempts at applying the learning experience to understanding of self, others, and/or course concepts but fails to demonstrate depth of analysis.	The reflection demonstrates student attempts to analyse the experience but analysis lacks depth.	The reflection moves beyond simple description of the experience to an analysis of how the experience contributed to student understanding of self, others, and/or course concepts.
	No attempt to demonstrate connections to previous learning or experience.	There is little to no attempt to demonstrate connections between the learning experience and previous other personal and/or learning experiences.	The reflection demonstrates connections between the experience and material from other courses; past experience; and/or personal goals.	The reflection demonstrates connections between the experience and material from other courses; past experience; and/or personal goals.
	Not attempt at self-criticism.	There is some attempt at self-criticism, but the self-reflection fails to demonstrate a new awareness of personal biases, etc.	The reflection demonstrates ability of the student to question their own biases, stereotypes, preconceptions.	The reflection demonstrates ability of the student to question their own biases, stereotypes, preconceptions, and/or assumptions and define new modes of thinking as a result.

Chabon, S. and Lee-Wilkerson, D. (2006). Use of journal writing in the assessment of CSD students’ learning about diversity: A method worthy of reflection. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 27(3), 146-158.

Dawson, P. (2017) Assessment rubrics: towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347-360.

Jones, S. (n.d.) Using reflection for assessment . Office of Service Learning, IUPUI. (link to PDF on external site)

Moon J.A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. Routledge.

Kohn, A. (2006). The trouble with rubrics. English Journal, 95(4).

Wald, H.S., Borkan, J.M., Scott Taylor, J., Anthony, D., and Reis, S.P. (2012) Fostering and evaluating reflective capacity in medical education: Developing the REFLECT rubric for assessing reflective writing. Academic Medicine, 87(1), 41-50.

Rubric Best Practices, Examples, and Templates

A rubric is a scoring tool that identifies the different criteria relevant to an assignment, assessment, or learning outcome and states the possible levels of achievement in a specific, clear, and objective way. Use rubrics to assess project-based student work including essays, group projects, creative endeavors, and oral presentations.

Rubrics can help instructors communicate expectations to students and assess student work fairly, consistently and efficiently. Rubrics can provide students with informative feedback on their strengths and weaknesses so that they can reflect on their performance and work on areas that need improvement.

How to Get Started

Best practices, moodle how-to guides.

• Workshop Recording (Spring 2024)
• Workshop Registration

Step 1: Analyze the assignment

The first step in the rubric creation process is to analyze the assignment or assessment for which you are creating a rubric. To do this, consider the following questions:

• What is the purpose of the assignment and your feedback? What do you want students to demonstrate through the completion of this assignment (i.e. what are the learning objectives measured by it)? Is it a summative assessment, or will students use the feedback to create an improved product?
• Does the assignment break down into different or smaller tasks? Are these tasks equally important as the main assignment?
• What would an “excellent” assignment look like? An “acceptable” assignment? One that still needs major work?
• How detailed do you want the feedback you give students to be? Do you want/need to give them a grade?

Step 2: Decide what kind of rubric you will use

Types of rubrics: holistic, analytic/descriptive, single-point

Holistic Rubric. A holistic rubric includes all the criteria (such as clarity, organization, mechanics, etc.) to be considered together and included in a single evaluation. With a holistic rubric, the rater or grader assigns a single score based on an overall judgment of the student’s work, using descriptions of each performance level to assign the score.

Advantages of holistic rubrics:

• Can p lace an emphasis on what learners can demonstrate rather than what they cannot
• Save grader time by minimizing the number of evaluations to be made for each student
• Can be used consistently across raters, provided they have all been trained

Disadvantages of holistic rubrics:

• Provide less specific feedback than analytic/descriptive rubrics
• Can be difficult to choose a score when a student’s work is at varying levels across the criteria
• Any weighting of c riteria cannot be indicated in the rubric

Analytic/Descriptive Rubric . An analytic or descriptive rubric often takes the form of a table with the criteria listed in the left column and with levels of performance listed across the top row. Each cell contains a description of what the specified criterion looks like at a given level of performance. Each of the criteria is scored individually.

Advantages of analytic rubrics:

• Provide detailed feedback on areas of strength or weakness
• Each criterion can be weighted to reflect its relative importance

Disadvantages of analytic rubrics:

• More time-consuming to create and use than a holistic rubric
• May not be used consistently across raters unless the cells are well defined
• May result in giving less personalized feedback

Single-Point Rubric . A single-point rubric is breaks down the components of an assignment into different criteria, but instead of describing different levels of performance, only the “proficient” level is described. Feedback space is provided for instructors to give individualized comments to help students improve and/or show where they excelled beyond the proficiency descriptors.

Advantages of single-point rubrics:

• Easier to create than an analytic/descriptive rubric
• Perhaps more likely that students will read the descriptors
• Areas of concern and excellence are open-ended
• May removes a focus on the grade/points
• May increase student creativity in project-based assignments

Disadvantage of analytic rubrics: Requires more work for instructors writing feedback

Step 3 (Optional): Look for templates and examples.

You might Google, “Rubric for persuasive essay at the college level” and see if there are any publicly available examples to start from. Ask your colleagues if they have used a rubric for a similar assignment. Some examples are also available at the end of this article. These rubrics can be a great starting point for you, but consider steps 3, 4, and 5 below to ensure that the rubric matches your assignment description, learning objectives and expectations.

Step 4: Define the assignment criteria

Make a list of the knowledge and skills are you measuring with the assignment/assessment Refer to your stated learning objectives, the assignment instructions, past examples of student work, etc. for help.

  Helpful strategies for defining grading criteria:

• Collaborate with co-instructors, teaching assistants, and other colleagues
• Brainstorm and discuss with students
• Can they be observed and measured?
• Are they important and essential?
• Are they distinct from other criteria?
• Are they phrased in precise, unambiguous language?
• Revise the criteria as needed
• Consider whether some are more important than others, and how you will weight them.

Step 5: Design the rating scale

Most ratings scales include between 3 and 5 levels. Consider the following questions when designing your rating scale:

• Given what students are able to demonstrate in this assignment/assessment, what are the possible levels of achievement?
• How many levels would you like to include (more levels means more detailed descriptions)
• Will you use numbers and/or descriptive labels for each level of performance? (for example 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and/or Exceeds expectations, Accomplished, Proficient, Developing, Beginning, etc.)
• Don’t use too many columns, and recognize that some criteria can have more columns that others . The rubric needs to be comprehensible and organized. Pick the right amount of columns so that the criteria flow logically and naturally across levels.

Step 6: Write descriptions for each level of the rating scale

Artificial Intelligence tools like Chat GPT have proven to be useful tools for creating a rubric. You will want to engineer your prompt that you provide the AI assistant to ensure you get what you want. For example, you might provide the assignment description, the criteria you feel are important, and the number of levels of performance you want in your prompt. Use the results as a starting point, and adjust the descriptions as needed.

Building a rubric from scratch

For a single-point rubric , describe what would be considered “proficient,” i.e. B-level work, and provide that description. You might also include suggestions for students outside of the actual rubric about how they might surpass proficient-level work.

For analytic and holistic rubrics , c reate statements of expected performance at each level of the rubric.

• Consider what descriptor is appropriate for each criteria, e.g., presence vs absence, complete vs incomplete, many vs none, major vs minor, consistent vs inconsistent, always vs never. If you have an indicator described in one level, it will need to be described in each level.
• You might start with the top/exemplary level. What does it look like when a student has achieved excellence for each/every criterion? Then, look at the “bottom” level. What does it look like when a student has not achieved the learning goals in any way? Then, complete the in-between levels.
• For an analytic rubric , do this for each particular criterion of the rubric so that every cell in the table is filled. These descriptions help students understand your expectations and their performance in regard to those expectations.

Well-written descriptions:

• Describe observable and measurable behavior
• Use parallel language across the scale
• Indicate the degree to which the standards are met

Step 7: Create your rubric

Create your rubric in a table or spreadsheet in Word, Google Docs, Sheets, etc., and then transfer it by typing it into Moodle. You can also use online tools to create the rubric, but you will still have to type the criteria, indicators, levels, etc., into Moodle. Rubric creators: Rubistar , iRubric

Step 8: Pilot-test your rubric

Prior to implementing your rubric on a live course, obtain feedback from:

• Teacher assistants

Try out your new rubric on a sample of student work. After you pilot-test your rubric, analyze the results to consider its effectiveness and revise accordingly.

• Limit the rubric to a single page for reading and grading ease
• Use parallel language . Use similar language and syntax/wording from column to column. Make sure that the rubric can be easily read from left to right or vice versa.
• Use student-friendly language . Make sure the language is learning-level appropriate. If you use academic language or concepts, you will need to teach those concepts.
• Share and discuss the rubric with your students . Students should understand that the rubric is there to help them learn, reflect, and self-assess. If students use a rubric, they will understand the expectations and their relevance to learning.
• Consider scalability and reusability of rubrics. Create rubric templates that you can alter as needed for multiple assignments.
• Maximize the descriptiveness of your language. Avoid words like “good” and “excellent.” For example, instead of saying, “uses excellent sources,” you might describe what makes a resource excellent so that students will know. You might also consider reducing the reliance on quantity, such as a number of allowable misspelled words. Focus instead, for example, on how distracting any spelling errors are.

Example of an analytic rubric for a final paper

	Above Average (4)	Sufficient (3)	Developing (2)	Needs improvement (1)
(Thesis supported by relevant information and ideas	The central purpose of the student work is clear and supporting ideas always are always well-focused. Details are relevant, enrich the work.	The central purpose of the student work is clear and ideas are almost always focused in a way that supports the thesis. Relevant details illustrate the author’s ideas.	The central purpose of the student work is identified. Ideas are mostly focused in a way that supports the thesis.	The purpose of the student work is not well-defined. A number of central ideas do not support the thesis. Thoughts appear disconnected.
(Sequencing of elements/ ideas)	Information and ideas are presented in a logical sequence which flows naturally and is engaging to the audience.	Information and ideas are presented in a logical sequence which is followed by the reader with little or no difficulty.	Information and ideas are presented in an order that the audience can mostly follow.	Information and ideas are poorly sequenced. The audience has difficulty following the thread of thought.
(Correctness of grammar and spelling)	Minimal to no distracting errors in grammar and spelling.	The readability of the work is only slightly interrupted by spelling and/or grammatical errors.	Grammatical and/or spelling errors distract from the work.	The readability of the work is seriously hampered by spelling and/or grammatical errors.

Example of a holistic rubric for a final paper

The audience is able to easily identify the central message of the work and is engaged by the paper’s clear focus and relevant details. Information is presented logically and naturally. There are minimal to no distracting errors in grammar and spelling. : The audience is easily able to identify the focus of the student work which is supported by relevant ideas and supporting details. Information is presented in a logical manner that is easily followed. The readability of the work is only slightly interrupted by errors. : The audience can identify the central purpose of the student work without little difficulty and supporting ideas are present and clear. The information is presented in an orderly fashion that can be followed with little difficulty. Grammatical and spelling errors distract from the work. : The audience cannot clearly or easily identify the central ideas or purpose of the student work. Information is presented in a disorganized fashion causing the audience to have difficulty following the author’s ideas. The readability of the work is seriously hampered by errors.

Single-Point Rubric

Advanced (evidence of exceeding standards)	Criteria described a proficient level	Concerns (things that need work)
	Criteria #1: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #2: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #3: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #4: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
90-100 points	80-90 points	<80 points

More examples:

• Single Point Rubric Template ( variation )
• Analytic Rubric Template make a copy to edit
• A Rubric for Rubrics
• Bank of Online Discussion Rubrics in different formats
• Mathematical Presentations Descriptive Rubric
• Math Proof Assessment Rubric
• Kansas State Sample Rubrics
• Design Single Point Rubric

Technology Tools: Rubrics in Moodle

• Moodle Docs: Rubrics
• Moodle Docs: Grading Guide (use for single-point rubrics)

Tools with rubrics (other than Moodle)

• Google Assignments
• Turnitin Assignments: Rubric or Grading Form

Other resources

• DePaul University (n.d.). Rubrics .
• Gonzalez, J. (2014). Know your terms: Holistic, Analytic, and Single-Point Rubrics . Cult of Pedagogy.
• Goodrich, H. (1996). Understanding rubrics . Teaching for Authentic Student Performance, 54 (4), 14-17. Retrieved from   
• Miller, A. (2012). Tame the beast: tips for designing and using rubrics.
• Ragupathi, K., Lee, A. (2020). Beyond Fairness and Consistency in Grading: The Role of Rubrics in Higher Education. In: Sanger, C., Gleason, N. (eds) Diversity and Inclusion in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.

• help_outline help

iRubric: Response Essay Rubric

      '; }         delete   Do more...

Rubric Code: By Ready to use Public Rubric Subject:    Type:    Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Reflective Essay Rubric

Maximum Points: A maximum of 5 points for each row is obtainable. TOTAL AVAILABLE POINTS: 25

Academic Resources

• Academic Calendar
• Academic Catalog
• Academic Success
• BlueM@il (Email)
• Campus Connect
• Desire2Learn (D2L)

Campus Resources

• Campus Security
• Campus Maps

University Resources

• Technology Help Desk

Information For

• Alumni & Friends
• Current Students
• Faculty & Staff

Feedback & Grading

• Exit Tickets and Midterm Surveys
• Direct vs. Indirect Assessment
• Assessment and Bias
• Low-Stakes Assignments
• High-Stakes Assignments
• Types of Rubrics
• Creating Rubrics
• Evaluating Rubrics
• More Examples

Assessing Reflection

• Responding to Plagiarism
• Submitting Grades
• Teaching at DePaul
• Support Services
• Teaching Guides
• Technology Tools

Teaching Commons > Teaching Guides > Feedback & Grading > Rubrics > Assessing Reflection

Assessing reflection or reflective processes can be particularly challenging. A few examples of this challenge are:

• If reflection is meant to be a intimately personal experience, do we alter it simply by defining standards for assessment, making it a less personal and externally imposed process?
• Assessment of reflection depends on written or spoken language. How might this handicap students who are less familiar with conventional and discipline or context-specific linguistic expectations in a manner that has nothing to do with those students’ abilities to engage in refection?
• For example, will your students who are non-native speakers, or come from backgrounds with less exposure to common academic linguistic forms have a more difficult time demonstrating their ability to reflect well?

As there is not just one type of student in your classes/programs, there is not one answer to designing high quality assessment techniques for assessing reflection. You must design your reflection assignments as well as your assessments carefully considering your own context.

A few things to consider when you are designing your assessment strategies are:

• What is the purpose of the reflection?
• Are you interested in the process of reflection, the products of reflection or both?
• How will the assessment task itself promote reflection or reflective practices?
• How will you make judgements about reflection?
• How will you make it clear to students what you expect of them in terms of their reflection?

Examples of Models for Assessing Reflection

Hatton and smith (1995).

Hatton and Smith described four progressive levels of reflection, with each increased level indicating more/better reflective processes.

• Descriptive – this is not reflection, but simply describes events that occurred with no attempt to describe ‘why.’
• Descriptive Reflection – description includes reasons, but simply reports reasons.
• Dialogic Reflection – reflection as a personal dialogue (questioning, considering alternatives).
• wonder, what if, perhaps….
• Critical Reflection – takes into account context in which events occur, questions assumptions, considers alternatives, thinks about consequences of decisions/actions on others, and engages in reflective skepticism.

Ash and Clayton (2004)

Ash and Clayton describe a guided process for facilitating and assessing reflection. These researchers focus specifically on service learning, but their model could be applied to other types of learning experiences.

• Students describe the experience.
• Analyze the experience(s) from different categories of  perspectives based on the learning objective:
• Identify learning in each category
• Artic ulate learning by developing a well-developed statement of learning (articulated learni ng), using the four guiding questions that structure articulated learning as a guide:
• What did I learn?
• How, specifically, did I learn it?
• Why does this learning matter, or why is it significant?
• In what ways will I use this learning?
• Analyze/revise articulated le arning statements by applying standards of critical thinking through: 
• Student self-assessment
• Instructor feedback
• Finalize the articulated learning statements, aiming to fulfill all learning objectives in each categories and meet standards of critical thinking.
• Undertake new learning experiences, including when feasible, taking action on articulated learning statements to test the initial conclusions reached.
• Continue the reflection process, articulating additional complexity of the learning in articulated learning statements when possible.

Element	Description
Mechanics	Consistently avoids typographical, spelling and grammatical errors.
Connection to Experience	Makes clear the connection(s) between the experience and the dimension being discussed.
Accuracy	Makes statements of fact that are accurate and supported with evidence; for academic articulated learning statements, accurately identifies, describes, and applies appropriate academic principle(s).
Clarity	Consistently expands on and expresses ideas in alternative ways, provides examples/illustrations.
Relevance	Describes learning that is relevant to the articulated learning statement category and keeps the discussion specific to the learning being articulated.
Depth	Addresses the complexity of the problem; answers important question(s) that are raised; avoids over-simplifying when making connections.
Breadth	Gives meaningful consideration to alternative points of view and interpretations.
Logic	Demonstrates a line of reasoning that is logical, with conclusions or goals that follow clearly from it.
Significance	Draws conclusions, sets goals that address a (the) major issue(s) raised by the experience.

Rubrics for Written Assignments

Introduction.

Most graduate courses require students to produce written work although these products differ in purpose and required parameters (e.g., format, length, or tone). Thus, a faculty member might be called on to evaluate short reflection papers, longer lab reports, or longer still term papers. In evaluating a written product, it is important to choose or develop a rubric in order to bring consistency, fairness, and clarity to the task. Creating Rubrics

An analytic rubric is a scoring guide used to evaluate performance, a product, or a project. It has three parts: 1) performance criteria; 2) rating scale; and 3) indicators. How to Develop a Rubric

Using a rubric to evaluate student written work is helpful for both faculty and students. For faculty, rubrics

• Reduce the time spent grading by allowing instructors to refer to a substantive description without writing long comments
• Help to identify strengths and weaknesses across an entire class and adjust instruction appropriately
• Help to ensure consistency across time and across graders
• Reduce the uncertainty that can accompany grading
• Discourage complaints about grades

Rubrics help students to

• Understand instructors’ expectations and standards
• Use instructor feedback to improve their performance
• Monitor and assess their own progress
• Recognize their strengths and weaknesses and direct their efforts accordingly

Benefitting from Rubrics

Developing a Rubric

Developing a rubric entails the following steps:

• ​​​​​​​List all the possible criteria students should demonstrate in the assignment.
• Decide which of those criteria are crucial. Ideally, the rubric will have three to five performance criteria.
• Criteria should be: unambiguous, clearly stated, measurable, precise, and distinct.
• Prioritize the criteria by relating them to the learning objectives for the unit and determining which skills are essential at competent or proficiency levels for the assignment.
• Basic, Developing, Accomplished, Exemplary
• Poor, Below Average, Average, Above Average, Excellent
• Below Expectations, Basic, Proficient, Outstanding
• Unsatisfactory, Basic, Competent, Distinguished
• Developing, Acceptable, Target
• Does Not Meet Expectations, Meets Expectations, Exceeds Expectations
• 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
• Low Mastery, Average Mastery, High Mastery
• Missing, unclear, clear, thorough
• Below expectations, basic, proficient, outstanding
• Never, rarely, sometimes, often, always
• Novice, apprentice, proficient, master ​​​​​​​
• Develop indicators of quality. Define the performance expected of the ideal assessment for each criterion. Begin with the highest level of the scale to define top quality performance and create indicators for all performance levels.
• Discuss the rubric with students so that they are clear on the expectations. Students can even help create the rubric.
• Does the rubric relate to the outcome(s) being measured?
• Does it cover important criteria for student performance?
• Does the top end of the rubric reflect excellence?
• Are the criteria and scales well-defined?
• Share the rubric with colleagues, students, and experts
• Test the rubric on samples of student work
• If multiple raters are being used, discuss common definitions, standards, and expectations for quality and practice using the rubric and comparing ratings to determine consistency in judgments across raters.

Rubrics for Written Work

There are, of course, many types of student papers, which differ in the learning outcomes they represent and the skills they are meant to develop. Ideally, an instructor will develop a unique rubric for each assignment, based on the intent of the assignment and the relevant learning objectives as well as the overall learning objectives for the course. When creating a rubric to evaluate a written assignment, an instructor should be able to answer the following questions:

• What will distinguish the best papers from the least effective?
• What skills is this task meant to teach that should be evaluated with the rubric?
• What is the paper supposed to accomplish, and what is the process that the writer should go through to accomplish those goals?
• How will I know if they have learned what the task calls for them to learn?

Designing and Using Rubrics

A review of a sample of rubrics for evaluating papers indicates that they vary in both the number of dimensions and the content of the dimensions included used; however, it is possible to extract several common dimensions for evaluation. These may include the following:

• ​​​​​​​Thoroughness/completeness
• Currency/recency

Organization/structure

• Thesis statement/argument
• Supporting evidence
•  Logic/coherence
• Cohesiveness

Presentation of ideas

• Integration/synthesis
•  Evaluation
•  Creativity/originality

Writing style

• Conciseness
• Punctuation
• Word choice
• Sentence structure
• Use of APA style in text
• Use of APA style in references

An instructor creating a rubric should consider these dimensions and determine which ones are pertinent to the purpose of the assignment being evaluated. It is also possible to adopt or adapt existing rubrics. One common source is the Association of American Colleges and Universities Value Rubrics: Written Communication.

AACU Value Rubrics: Written Communication

Other examples of specific rubrics include the following:

Examples of Rubrics for Research Papers

Research Paper Rubric Cornell College Cole Library

Rubric for Research Paper Kansas State Assessment Toolkit

Rubric for Research Paper University of Florida Center for Teaching Excellence

Writing Rubric for Psychology Middlebury College Academics

Rubrics for Essays

Grading Rubrics: Essays Brandeis University Writing Program

Academic essay rubric University of Southern California Center for Teaching Excellence

Essay Grading Rubric University of Michigan Sweetland Center for Writing

Rubrics for Class Papers

College Level Writing Rubric Virginia Union University

Grading Rubric for Papers St. John’s University

Grading Rubric for Writing Assignment The American University of Rome

Rubrics for Reflection Papers

Reflection Writing Rubric Carnegie Mellon University Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence

Reflective Essay University of Florida Center for Teaching Excellence

Reflective essay rubric University of Southern California Center for Teaching Excellence

Creating Rubrics University of Texas/Austin Faculty Innovation Center

Evaluating Rubrics DePaul University Teaching Commons

Building A Rubric Columbia University Center for Teaching and Learning

Designing & Using Rubrics University of Michigan Sweetland Center for Writing

Grading with Rubrics Western University Center for Teaching and Learning

Grading Rubrics Berkeley Graduate Division Graduate Student Instructor Teaching & Resource Center