Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rubrics and Exemplars in Writing Assessment

  • Chapter
Leadership of Assessment, Inclusion, and Learning

Part of the book series: The Enabling Power of Assessment ((EPAS,volume 3))

Abstract

The use of rubrics for performance assessment as opposed to holistic methods is widely accepted as current enlightened practice and continues to receive considerable attention particularly in the current drive for increased accountability for student achievement. This has resulted in extensive discussion regarding their appropriateness, use and misuse, particularly in the assessment of writing. In order to understand the basis of the conflicting viewpoints that have characterised the rubrics debate in assessment of writing over the last decade, its historical roots and philosophical underpinnings are considered. A critical analysis of the scholarly literature on the role of rubrics and their relationship with writing exemplars provides the context for a discussion of current trends in assessment for learning and increased emphasis on student peer and self-assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andrade, H. L. (2006). The trouble with a narrow view of rubrics. English Journal, 95(6), 9–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, H. L., & Boulay, B. A. (2003). Role of rubric-referenced self-assessment in learning to write. Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(2), 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, H. L., Wang, X., Du, Y., & Akawi, R. L. (2009). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Research, 102(4), 287–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arter, J., & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breland, H. M. (1983). The direct assessment of writing skill: A measurement review. New York, NY: College Board Report, No. 83-6. (ETS RR No. 83-32).

    Google Scholar 

  • Broad, B. (2002). What we really value beyond rubrics in teaching and assessing writing. Logan, UT: Utah State, UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create rubrics for formative assessment and grading. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. T. L., Glasswell, K., & Harland, D. (2014). Accuracy in the scoring of writing: Studies of reliability and validity using a New Zealand writing assessment system. Assessing Writing, 9(2), 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks, T. (2011). Assessment for learning in the accountability era: New Zealand. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 71–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, J. J., & Maxwell, G. S. (1999). Contextualising authentic assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 6(2), 177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dann, R. (2002). Promoting assessment as learning. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Performance counts: Assessment systems that support high-quality learning. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from: http://www.hewlett.org/library/grantee-publication/performance-counts-assessment-systems-support-high-quality-learning

  • Davies, A. (2000). Making classroom assessment work. Courtney, BC, Canada: Connections Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, P. B., French, J. W., & Carlton, S. T. (1961). Factors in judgments of writing ability (ETS Research Bulletin 61-15). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. (2002, May). From episteme to phronesis to artistry in the study and improvement of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(4), 375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W. (1999). The uses and limits of performance assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(9), 658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B. B., & Schmitt, V. L. (2007). Coming to terms with classroom assessment. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(3), 402–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Truth and method. New York, NY: The Continuum Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodrich Andrade, H. (2005). Teaching with rubrics. College Teaching, 53(1), 27–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodrich Andrade, H. L., & Du, Y. (2005). Student perspectives on rubric-referenced assessment. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Western Australia. (2007). Writing and marking guide: Western Australian literacy and numeracy assessment. Perth, Australia: Department of Education and Training.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillegas, M. B. (1912). A scale for the measurement of quality in English composition for young people. New York, NY: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudelson, E. (1923). The development and comparative values of composition scales. English Journal, 12(3), 163–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huot, B. (1990). The literature of direct writing assessment: Major concerns and prevailing trends. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 237–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huot, B. (2002). (Re)Articulating writing assessment. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, A. (2006). The trouble with rubrics. English Journal, 95(4), 12–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Limbrick, L., & Knight, N. (2005). Close reading of students’ writing: What teachers learn about writing. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 4(2), 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingston, M. (2012). The infamy of grading rubrics. English Journal, 102(2), 108–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mabry, L. (1999). Writing to the rubric. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(9), 673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mabry, L. (2004). Strange, yet familiar: Assessment-driven education. In K. A. Sirotnik (Ed.), Holding accountability accountable: What ought to matter in public education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (1999). The understanding by design handbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, D., & Mooney, T. (2002). The phenomenological reader. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, W., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2000). Im/proper accountability: Towards a theory of critical literacy and assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 7(1), 123–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New Zealand Ministry of Education. (n.d.). Assessment online. Retrieved from: http://assessment.tki.org.nz/

  • Noyes, E. C. (1912). Progress in standardizing the measurement of composition. The English Journal, 1(9), 532–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2002). The use of exemplars and formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4), 309–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2013). Self-assessment: Theoretical and practical connotations. When it happens, how is it acquired and what to do to develop it in our students. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 11(2), 551–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panadero, E., Romero, M., & Strijbos, J. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: Effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(4), 195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, F. E. (1919). The measurement of composition in English classes. The English Journal, 98(4), 203–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, J., & Beauchamp, L. (2012). From knowledge to action: Shaping the future of curriculum development in Alberta. Edmonton, AB, Canada: Alberta Education. Retrieved: http://education.alberta.ca/department/ipr/curriculum/research/knowledgetoaction.aspx

  • Popham, J. W. (1997). What’s wrong – And what’s right – With rubrics. Educational Leadership, 12, 72–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popham, J. W. (2003). Test better, teach better. Alexandria, VA: Association for Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redecker, C., & Johannessen, O. (2013). Changing assessment: Towards a new assessment paradigm using ICT. European Journal of Education, 48(1), 79–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, J. M. (1903). English: The need of a new basis in education. Forum, October, 35, 269–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, R. (2010). Policy brief: Principles for a comprehensive assessment system. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved from: http://all4ed.org/wp-content/uploads/ComprehensiveAssessmentSystem.pdf

  • Saddler, B., & Andrade, H. (2004). The writing rubric. Educational Leadership, 62(2), 48–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (2008). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. In W. Harlen (Ed.), Student assessment and testing (pp. 3–28). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (2009). Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 159–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slomp, D. H. (2008). Harming not helping: The impact of a Canadian standardized writing assessment on curriculum and pedagogy. Assessing Writing, 13(3), 180–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spandel, V. (2006). In defense of rubrics. English Journal, 96(1), 19–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D., & Mickunas, A. (1990). Exploring phenomenology. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L. (1915). Thorndike extension of the Hillegas scale. New York, NY: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timperley, H. S., & Parr, J. M. (2009). What is this lesson about? Instructional processes and student understandings in writing classrooms. Curriculum Journal, 20(1), 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Towne, C. F. (1918). Making a scale for the measurement of English composition. The Elementary School Journal, 19(1), 41–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turley, E. D., & Gallagher, C. W. (2008). On the uses of rubrics: Refraining the great rubric debate. English Journal, 97(4), 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, G. (1991). Standards, not standardization: Evoking quality student work. (Cover story). Educational Leadership, 48(5), 18–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, G. (1996). Anchoring assessment with exemplars: Why students and teachers need models. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40(2), 66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. (2007a). The view from somewhere. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 76–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M. (2007b). Why I won’t be using rubrics to respond to students’ writing. English Journal, 96(4), 62–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yancey, K. B. (1999). Looking back as we look forward: Historicizing writing assessment. College Composition and Communication, 50(3), 483–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshina, J. M., & Harada, V. H. (2007). Involving students in learning through rubrics. Library Media Connection, 25(5), 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Visible Assessment for Learning Inc., Calgary, AB, Canada

    Johanna de Leeuw (Founder & President)

Authors
  1. Johanna de Leeuw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johanna de Leeuw .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

    Shelleyann Scott

  2. Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

    Donald E. Scott

  3. Faculty of Continuing Education and Extension, Mount Royal University, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

    Charles F. Webber

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

de Leeuw, J. (2016). Rubrics and Exemplars in Writing Assessment. In: Scott, S., Scott, D., Webber, C. (eds) Leadership of Assessment, Inclusion, and Learning. The Enabling Power of Assessment, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23347-5_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23347-5_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23346-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23347-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation