Assessments should indicate to your students how you want them to demonstrate that they've understood the knowledge shared with them and how they are developing the skills and attitudes you’ve identified as relevant to the programme of study. Making assessments work as part of an outcomes-based system depends on having in place formal assessment criteria that you write and make available to both your students and markers. These criteria are the means by which you will test the extent to which students have met the outcomes planned for them.
Dependent upon whether your assessment is worth a percentage or all of the overall weighting for the module will impact on the assessment criteria used and the weighting applied. It is good practice to provide a weighting for each assessment criterion so students know how much time to invest in each aspect of the assessment.
LEaD have developed a number of marking templates. You can import and modify these to reflect your assessment criteria when marking with Turnitin's Feedback Studio or in a Moodle Assignment activity.
You need to attach the marking template - Rubric, Grading Form/Marking guide - prior to any students submitting coursework to the assignment. Students must be able to view the assessment criteria before they start their assignment. Ensure that your marking template is correct before you start marking. You will not be able to edit your marking template once you have used it to mark a student's submission.
You can use the approach in Template 1 below to provide the criteria for an assessment and the weight for each criterion. Using this approach enables you to use the full range of marks. When marking, you provide a mark and feedback for each criterion including advice on how to gain further marks. You can use this template to mark both Moodle and Turnitin assignments. Use the Grading Form in Turnitin and the Marking Guide in Moodle.
This Rubric template outlines the assessment criteria and provides a custom scoring guide for different steps in achieving each criterion. You can select which part of the scale a student’s work equates to for each criterion. Generic feedback is provided to the student depending on their performance in meeting each criterion. The overall mark is calculated by the feedback fields you select on the Rubric. This Rubric is suitable for use where each of your criterion has a different weighting and can be used for both Moodle and Turnitin assignments.
| Criterion | Excellent | Good | Average | Poor | Not attempted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge of the concepts | Clear exploration and explanation of the key concepts and related knowledge (20%) | Exploration and explanation of the key concepts and related knowledge but at times this lacked clarity (15%) | Exploration and explanation of some the key concepts and related knowledge but some were missing (10%) | Limited exploration and explanation of key concepts and related knowledge (5%) | No reference to the key concepts or related knowledge (0%) |
| Application of theory / Literature | Critical discussion throughout with appropriate application of theory/literature (40%) | Critical discussion across most of the essay with appropriate application of theory/literature (30%) | Evidence of critical discussion across the essay with some application of theory / literature (20%) | Limited evidence of critical discussion with reference to limited theory / literature (10%) | No evidence of critical discussion and no application of theory / literature (0%) |
| Application to practice | Clear and explicit application of theory to practice (20%) | Some explicit application of theory to practice (15%) | Application of theory to practice but the relevance lacks clarity (10%) | Brief reference to applying theory to practice (5%) | No application of theory to practice (0%) |
| Reflection on personal learning | Clear reflection on personal learning and future implications (10%) | Clear reflection on personal learning with a brief reference to future implications (7.5%) | Reflection on personal learning but no reference to future implications (5%) | Brief reference only to personal learning (2.5%) | No reflection on personal learning (0%) |
| Presentation and Referencing | Clear, concise and logical development of the work with good use of English and grammar and accurate referencing using a recognised referencing system (10%) | Clear, concise and logical development of the work with accurate use of English and grammar and a recognised referencing system used but small errors in its use (7.5%) | Clear and concise with some logical development of the work some small errors in the use of English and grammar and with a recognised referencing system used but small errors in its use (5%) | Clear but needed to be more concise and be more logical in development with some of the English and grammar needs attention and a recognised referencing system used but many errors in its use (2.5%) | Poorly structured lacking clarity and the use of English is poor with a range of grammar errors and referencing is incomplete and does not use a recognised system (0%) |
This templated rubric outlines the assessment criteria and provides a scoring range for different steps in achieving the criteria. You can select the scoring range a student’s work equates to for each criterion and the associated feedback for this scoring range. The overall mark is not calculated by the feedback fields you select on the Rubric. You will need to manually input the student's overall grade. This rubric can be used with Turnitin assignments only where marking and feedback is completed using Feedback Studio.
| Criterion |
First 80%+ Outstanding |
First 70%-79% Excellent |
2.1 60-69% Very good |
2.2 50-59% Satisfactory |
Third 40-49% |
Fail 39%- |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Answers the question; provides analysis |
*Exceptional analysis to a level equivalent of publishable scholarship. *Originality of analysis |
*Comprehensive and effective answer to the question supported by evidence. *High-level synthesis of material. Evaluates evidence and sources; identifies relationships between ideas. *Contains some creative or original thinking |
*Contains a clear answer to the question supported by evidence * Evaluation and synthesis of ideas |
*Covers most aspects of the question *Demonstrates understanding of evidence and sources, but these may not always be synthesised or evaluated *May contain errors of emphasis |
*Addresses question, but may contain gaps *Demonstrates understanding of material but describes rather than evaluates content. *May contain errors of fact or emphasis. |
*Failure to address important aspects of the question *Demonstrates limited understanding *Sources are not evaluated *May contain serious errors and/or omission |
| Research | *Exceptional use of a wide range of literature at a level equivalent to publishable scholarship *Comprehensiveness of research |
*Demonstrates extensive research and reading *Refers to a wide range of sources |
*Demonstrates thorough research and reading *Refers to a range of sources |
*Demonstrates researching and reading *Refers to sources |
*Demonstrates limited research or reading *Typical weaknesses: over-reliant on one or two authorities |
*Contains very little use of evidence *May be heavily reliant on lecture notes |
| Referencing & formatting | *Exceptional use of Harvard referencing and formatting to standards of publishable scholarship |
*Strict adherence to Harvard style of referencing. *Presented according to the style guide |
*Adherence to the Harvard style of referencing *Presented according to the style guide |
*Mostly adheres to the Harvard style of referencing *Mostly presented according to the style guide |
* Some issues or errors in Harvard referencing. *May be issues with presentation |
*Harvard referencing of a standard which does not permit easy access to sources |
| Writing | * Exceptional writing and presentation, to the level of publishable scholarship. |
*Excellent writing style. *Almost flawless grammar, spelling and punctuation *Sentences flow logically |
*Mainly accurate grammar, spelling and punctuation *Sentences are largely logical in their flow |
*Generally clear writing style *Acceptable grammar, spelling and punctuation *Sentences tend to flow |
*English needs more work * Erratic grammar, spelling and punctuation *There may be jumps between sentences |
*Meaning obscured by poor style, grammar, punctuation or spelling *Lack of logical flow between subsequent sentences |
You select standardised feedback for each student based on the standard that they reach for each of the criterion. The grade is automatically calculated for the student assignment. This Rubric will help to standardise grading and feedback when working with a group of markers.
The disadvantage of this type of marking template is that you are limited within a range of marks.
Standardised feedback is provided to each student based on the standard that they reach for each criterion. The marker has to calculate the final grade.
The disadvantage of this type of marking template is that students may find it challenging to understand why they receive a different mark to their peers when they receive the same feedback per criterion.
The Grading Form allows for personalised feedback for each student against the criteria and encourages the use of the full range of marks. The mark is automatically calculated based on the mark you input for each criterion. You cannot set a maximum mark for each criterion so present this information in the description field.
The disadvantage of this type of marking template is that it does not standardise grading or marking across a group of markers.
Additional guidance on how to use these templates to create rubrics and marking forms/grading forms in Moodle assignments and Turnitin assignments.
