Universidad Nacional

Centro de Investigacin y Docencia en Educacin

Divisin de Educologa- Sistema de Estudios de Posgrado
Maestra en Educacin con nfasis en el Aprendizaje del Ingls
Evaluacin en el Aprendizaje del Ingls
Facilitadora: Cindy Rodrguez Soto

Name: ____Mary Peabody___ Date. July 18th. Obt.Pts. 48pts/ _48__ %20/_20__ Grade 100/___100__
Assessment Instrument Rubric
General Instructions: Each student will design two assessment instruments (Analytic/holistic or Hybrid Rubrics) that can be used in one of the classes he or
she is currently teaching or that s/he has recently taught. These instruments should be designed to evaluate one or both productive skills (Speaking and
Writing) and could be meant to evaluate an oral or written exam, homework, or project. The instrument should also include the instructions of the task they
were designed for.
Each student will also present a two-pages rationale (one page per instrument) describing the purposes for which they were designed, how they are meant to
be used (e.g., for formative/summative assessment, peer or self-assessment, etc.), and in which teaching situation they are going to be used for.
Rubric instructions: The following rubric will be used to grade your assignment and also to guide you through the assignment requirements. After reading
your assignment, the facilitator will assign a level of completion to each criterion. Each level of completion is described at the bottom, so that you understand
what the facilitator means with a developing or accomplished. Please take some time to read the descriptors and the criterion. The facilitator will also add
comments when necessary.

Assessment Instrument Rubric

Needs
Further
improvement

There is evident face validity in both rubrics. The rubrics contain information
about the institution, the section/department, the person who applies it, the
total points, total percentage. There is space to write the students name, the
obtained points and percentage.
Objectives were clearly stated in terms of what was expected to be
accomplished within the given task. The objectives were specific, measurable,
achievable, relevant, time-bound and adjustable.
The tasks were clearly stated defined through specific, measurable,
achievable, relevant, time-bound and adjustable instructions of what students
are expected to do. The tasks and the rubrics are aligned, meaning that the
rubric is reliable transparent, practical for the task, time and amount of
students.
The instructions of the rubrics where included and clearly explains how will
the rubrics be used. Instructions are written in terms of the students as to
serve of communication on how to use the rubric.
The descriptors where more than three and are specific enough. They clearly
state what is expected from students and varied in each level of
accomplishment. The descriptors match with the nature of the task, the level
of students and the objective both in detail and in language.
The levels of accomplishment chosen have a positive and progress-related
meaning avoiding plain adjectives that can be subjective (such as good, bad,
poor). If necessary, the levels of accomplishment were explained.

Developin
g

Accomplishe
d

Exemplary

Comments

1-2

3-4

5-6

7-8

Mary, your third assignment

definitely showed clear
understanding on your side. Your
rubric definitely reflect
SMARTAed descriptors and the 8
cornerstones of assessment.
OUSTANDING!!

The points were well balanced according to the objective, the task, the
percentage and the amount of information. The total points reflect the points
defined on the rubric.
The rationale was done within two pages minimum. It describes the purposes
for which the instruments were designed, how they are meant to be used
(e.g., for formative/summative assessment, peer or self-assessment, etc.),
and in which teaching situation they are going to be used for (number of
students,
The rubrics and rationale was handed in on time in a word document by
email. The entire task was sent in one single document.
Mechanics, spelling and language used were appropriated avoiding mistakes
that may affect the clarity and understanding of the message.

1-2

3-4

5-6

7-8

Exemplary: It means that the corresponding criterion was evident and/or well developed. Participant demonstrates mastery and understanding of the criterion requested. 4pts
Accomplished: It means that the criterion was well developed but the is room for improvement. Participant demonstrates good understanding of the criterion requested. There
might be something missing and not fully developed but it did not compromise the quality of the assignment. 3pts
Developing: Participant demonstrated understanding of the criterion by developing it, however it is somewhat incomplete or needs improvement. Participant demonstrates to be
moving forward in her/his learning process but further support and deeper development or completeness is required. Participant may want to double check notes, readings; or ask
for further explanations/support from peers or facilitator. 2pts
Needs further improvement: It means there was a modest development or presence of the corresponding criterion. Participant may want to double read assigned readings.
Student may want to consider double-checking notes and requesting for the support of peers and facilitator. The criterion needs more development and analysis, or needs to be
entirely stated. 1pt. or 0pts in case the criterion was not included.