Discussion Board Rubric Example

Due No Due Date
Points 0

Discussion Board Rubric Explanation.docx Download Discussion Board Rubric Explanation.docx

Assessment Project: Pamela Costa’s 2017 Summer “deliverable”

Project title: A “universal” rubric to assess critical thinking via online student discussions

Author: Pamela Costa, Ph.D. (Psychology)

Date: June 1- Aug 20, 2017

Related Outcomes: This project focused on the following Degree, Program and Course Learning Outcomes:

DLO: Critical Thinking & Problem Solving (CRT): Compare, analyze, and evaluate information and ideas, and use sound thinking skills to solve problems.

PLO: (Social Sciences PLO #6) Evaluate the quality/credibility of information from various kinds of sources (academic, journalistic, popular media) (CRT, IIT)

Course Outcomes: PSYC 220 (Abnormal Psychology Outcome #6) Identify and evaluate the source, context and credibility of behavioral claims. (CRT, IT)

Goal: Design a discussion board rubric related to the Critical Thinking outcome, that can be applied campus-wide, across multiple programs, disciplines and courses.

Background information/Process:

Eight different rubrics used at 2 and 4 year institutions were carefully examined to derive the current rubric (see sources). The new rubric was employed in a Summer, 2017 Abnormal Psych (PSYC&220) course. This class has a prerequisite of PSYC& 100, which has a prerequisite to be “Engl101 ready”. Most students taking PSYC&220 have already taken ENG101 and are within 1 quarter of graduation.

Student responses that earned at least a 75% (12/15) on the rubric, successfully met the criteria for Course Outcome #6 Identify and evaluate the source, context and credibility of behavioral claims. (CRT, IT). The pre-set (default) rubric cut-off score for this outcome was a 3/5.

Results: Thirty-one, PSYC&220 students participated in the project and yielded the following results across 5 Discussion Boards, each worth 15 points (5 points total on the rubric, including a score of 3 or better for “meeting outcome criteria”). Seventy percent of students met/exceeded expectation for the outcome” “Identify and evaluate the source, context and credibility of behavioral claims. (CRT, IT).” The class mean was a 4.4/5, when averaged across all 5 Discussion Board scores for the course. Given the course prerequisite of PSYC& 100 and student proximity to graduation, these results were expected.

Challenges: While finding helpful resources for universal rubrics was straightforward and the resources were abundant, there were several challenges in using Canvas and the Learning Mastery Gradebook. Specifically, the primary challenge was maintaining pedagogical soundness while implementing an independent course assessment project. In Canvas Gradebook when you add a Learn Mastery Gradebook outcome, Canvas unchecks “add own comments”. Cannot have outcome attached to rubric AND include instructor comments at the same time. Can this be changed by eLearning staff or administration?

Data Analysis Issues: This initial assessment serves as a baseline to establish future options on the Learning Mastery Gradebook. Question: Should we change the options from “3 or better” on a decaying average?

Resources:

FORMS/TEMPLATES:

Assessment Project Report Form (Lane Community College) Links to an external site.

RUBRICS:

Discussion Board Tips and Pedagogy (Center for Teaching and Assessment)

Sample Discussion Rubrics (Highline Community College, Concordia; NAU, Univ. of Wisconsin-Stout).

Research Design Scoring Guide (Altman, R.)

Discussion Board Grading Rubric (Sumpter, J.)

Teaching of Psychology Online Member idea Exchange: How to use scoring rubrics

University of Wisconsin- Stout: Online Discussion Rubric

HELPFUL GUIDES:

Brookhart, S. M. (2013) How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading.

Alexandria, Va: ASCD.

Examples of Evidence of Student Learning: https://www.msche.org/publications/examples-of-evidence-of-student-learning.pdf Links to an external site.

Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning: A common sense guide (2ed.). San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.