Before you start to build a rubric, you need to gather the information that the rubric will contain, and consider some key aspects in its design. This resource outlines 13 practical steps to help you design a rubric that accurately evaluates student performance and enhances demonstration of learning outcomes.
Open the accordions to learn more
A holistic rubric allows markers to provide a grade based on overall impressions or global descriptions of student performance in a task.
Rather than including multiple criteria, there is just one. This approach is useful when the overall performance in a task is more important than the individual components, or where the criteria are complex and interwoven (e.g., higher order thinking) and difficult to distinguish from one another.
A holistic rubric supports markers in applying their expert evaluative judgement, but inducting markers and students into these notions of quality can be challenging and must be supported. There needs to be a discussion on what to do when student performance lies across two or more descriptors.
| High distinction (HD) | Distinction (D) | Credit (C) | Pass (P) | Fail (N) |
| Broad statement indicating the performance standards for a high distinction across all criteria. | Broad statement indicating the performance standards for a distinction across all criteria. | Broad statement indicating the performance standards for a credit across all criteria. | Broad statement indicating the performance standards for a pass across all criteria. | Broad statement indicating what performance standards for a fail across all criteria. |
An analytical approach breaks down the criteria and separates them into different levels of performance (or standards). Analytical rubrics allow for more detail to be provided and more transparency than holistic rubrics, which can assist markers and students in aligning their standards. It is important to conduct training and standard setting meetings for marking staff so as to ensure consistency and confirm benchmarks.
| Criteria | High distinction (HD) | Distinction (D) | Credit (C) | Pass (P) | Fail (N) |
| Critical thinking and argument 45% | Specific statement indicating the attributes for critical thinking and argument at a high distinction standard. | Specific statement indicating the attributes for critical thinking and argument at a distinction standard. | Specific statement indicating the attributes for critical thinking and argument at a credit standard. | Specific statement indicating the attributes for critical thinking and argument at a pass standard. | Specific statement indicating what performance would constitute a fail in the critical thinking and argument criteria. |
| Research and evidence 40% | Specific statement indicating the attributes for research and evidence at a high distinction standard. | Specific statement indicating the attributes for research and evidence at a distinction standard. | Specific statement indicating the attributes for research and evidence at a credit standard. | Specific statement indicating the attributes for research and evidence at a pass standard. | Specific statement indicating what performance would constitute a fail in the research and evidence criteria. |
| etc. |
Rubrics, as covered previously, contain a set of standards, such as Distinction or Credit, with descriptors that define what student work looks like at each level, and for each criteria. Each row is a verbal description of a mastery continuum, with set levels (standards) that are ‘matched’ to expectations of that level. Having a few student exemplars at each level aids in creating more consistent marking by providing benchmarks. Exemplars also help to remove the subjective nature of some of the words or phrases that may have been used.
Ranged rubrics allow for a start and end points to be assigned. In the table below, Row 1 shows the percentage distribution or weight of each column. Row 2 shows all full and half marks as possible. Row 3 only has full marks, and Row 4 shows variation. What variation is used will depend on the capabilities of the rubric tools used, the assessment task, the wording of the rubric, the marking team, and also what variation is expected and (later) seen in student work. These will be individual choices based upon factors surrounding the assessment. Chapter 14 in Teaching for Quality Learning at University (2022) by Biggs, Tang and Kennedy has several quality examples of rubric formats with a range of assigned marks.
| HD | D | C | P | N | |
| 1. % | 80 - 100 | 70 - 79 | 60- 69 | 50 - 59 | 0 - 49 |
| 2. marks | 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, 10 | 7, 7.5 | 6, 6.5 | 5, 5.5 | 0, .5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5 |
| 3. marks | 8, 9, 10 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 |
| 4. marks | 8, 9, 10 | 7 | 6, 6.5 | 5, 5.5 | 0, 2, 4, 4.5 |
Feedback from markers and students should feed into future iterations of the marking guide for continuous improvement. When the assessment changes or the task is updated, then the rubric should also be updated.
Refer to Set up and grade using Moodle rubrics and Set up and grade using Moodle rubrics.
No content
Download sample rubrics and rubric template in both Microsoft Word and PDF formats.