Design a marking guide
Marking guides can be used when elements to be assessed are too small or don’t have enough distinct stages in the mastery scale to justify using a rubric. These elements can often be identified if you’ve tried to write a rubric and the descriptors:
- are the same, or very similar across several levels,
- have those subjective words like ‘mostly’ or ‘very’ as the only or main differences between levels (standards),
- have descriptors which are not actually distinct from one another, e.g ‘generally accurate’, vs ‘some errors’.
Once these non discriminating criteria have been identified, you should ask:
- Is this element important enough to be standing alone? / Does this element actually stand alone? - e.g Should citing and referencing be included as a part of how well someone communicates the overall idea, versus its own criteria.
- Can this element be broken into X different descriptors?
If you have answered no, then a marking guide might be the best option, as pushing ahead with a rubric may result in marks being skewed. It is possible for an assessment to have both a marking guide and a rubric to assist in assessing student performance. A rubric tends to look at production/performance/ability, etc. in a defined criteria that can be plotted on a mastery scale. Whereas a marking guide is better suited:
- to elements of a more binary nature, e.g. done/not done, used/not used
- to tasks that follow a procedure/a more prescribed course of action, e.g a checklist
- when there are many clear ‘sub elements’ of the task being assessed, i.e small (but important) elements are being assessed
- when there are not many gradients of ‘mastery’, i.e. there are limited standards
Marking guides, as opposed to rubrics, are often just for markers. It isn’t that students cannot see a marking guide, but often a marking guide contains answers, or sample answers, which might be more sensitive. Marking guides tend to detail how, where and why marks are assigned.
For example, there might be 5 marks assigned to calculating a mathematical equation, with 1 mark being given for using the correct equation, 2 marks for identifying 2 necessary numbers, 1 mark for getting the calculation correct until point A, and then 1 mark for the final correct answer. How marks are distributed is a decision that needs to be carefully considered and justified with reasoning, e.g. difficulty, complexity, etc.
Marking guides might incorporate elements of a checklist, i.e. if students demonstrate X, then award X marks. This is useful for assessing procedural tasks, which have more of a more prescribed flow, e.g., giving a patient an injection.
Marking guides should never have instructions on how to deduct marks, nor award bonus marks. If an assessment is out of 25 marks, then its range is 0-25.
Open the accordion below to see how to write a marking guide.
Open the accordions below to see samples of marking guides.
In tandem with the marking guide, there would be a task specification document for students that would give them some understanding on how they are being assessed and graded. As in exams, assessments might include the assigned marks or weightings to different questions or sections. This inclusion can provide valuable information about how in depth responses need to be.
Transparency around assessments and their marking, whether using rubrics or marking guides, is needed so as to inform students of what success looks like.