1

Emancipation of criteria, from the rubric and towards self-development

(No name for Peer Assessment)

Department of Education, University of the People

EDUC 5440: Assessment and Evaluation

Dr. Joseph Isaac

September 16, 2022

 2

Emancipation of criteria, from the rubric and towards self-development

On the use of rubrics to generate artifacts for grading, Valerie Chapman and Duane

Inman in A Conundrum: Rubrics or Creativity/Metacognitive Development? (2009) state that:

“Our concern is that the teacher is restricting students’ problem solving, decision-making,

and creativity—traits needed in a democratic society for governance as well as for

economic productivity. Are today’s educators systematically discouraging creative

thought and actions by our P–12 learners? Matching their work to a teacher-designed

template (i.e., a scoring rubric) is different from analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating

elements as students pull a product together for an assignment”.

(Chapman & Inman, 2009, p. 1999).

Democratic societies imply giving voice to every citizen in them, meaning the right to

produce their own perspectives and expression regarding ideas (‘their take’, speaking

colloquially), so long as this isn’t destructive for other people. On the other hand, part of

economic productivity thrives with the capacities of each individual. Technological development

for standardized processes of mass production has caused the replacement of human agency with

machines that are significantly able to carry out procedures in automated ways. However, people

are still required to monitor and, when necessary, intervene in the motion of these methods. What

is more, this technical reconfiguration of labor has partly shifted attention towards what

differentiates each individual contributing to societal economic functioning. This means it is

important to nurture ingenuity (creativity), to address problems and decisions when and where

machines are unable to. These are characteristics of a knowledge-based societies, which “rely on

the knowledge of their citizens to drive the innovation, entrepreneurship and dynamism of that

society’s economy”, according to the Organization of American States (OAS, 2022).

 3

Referring to the rubric I used for assessment in the workshop I did about trailer and reel

editing at my country’s national film school, ‘creativity’, ‘flexibility’ and ‘individual initiative’

were considered, a starting point for the exercise of rubric construction I look to carry out more

in the future as an educator. To begin with, the discipline – moving image production –

implicates creativity from the start. As an artform, it is also a subjective field and thus receptors

and assessors should allow a degree of flexibility in approaching its works.

Each resulting piece (trailer and reel) was graded against a rubric based on four criteria:

1. Student presented the work (0 marks if not handed in, 0.5 if handed late, 1 if handed on time);

2. Picture editing (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 or 2 marks for evidence of an editorial treatment that, in the case

of the trailer, summarized the short film and restructured it as a standalone promo, and in the

case of the reel, evidence of selection of clips from the students’ work and of arrangement for a

dramatic progression); 3. Sound and music treatment (0, 0.5 or 1 mark for evidence of the

aforementioned, with an intention behind the choices); 4. Titling (0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 or 1 mark for

including name of film, a variant of ‘coming soon’, cast and crew list and a dramatic intention

with the use of titles, in the case of the trailer, and name of the reel’s filmmaker, filmmaking

role, social media or website information, and a dramatic intention, in the case of the reel).

The previous criteria provide space for valuing creativity and exercising flexibility for

assessing the representation of the learners’ sensibilities. These were not explicitly delivered to

them as a table, but verbalized and visually represented in bullet point form in my explanation of

the exercises, in turn based on the theories I shared with them about their production (for

example, ‘the essential parts a trailer should have’, reinforced by ‘what I’ll be looking for is that

you include the following elements, with a dramatic motive of your ideation’). What the specific

treatment would be, with the artistic intentions that would motivate it, is singular to each piece.
 4

Additionally, the process grade for attendance and professionalism (which, to myself, I

dubbed the appreciative grade), contemplated the student attending each of the four lessons and,

during each session, evidence of working in class, actively participating in class, interest in their

project and seeking mentorship during or outside of class-time. Again, I spoke about this

component in presenting my assessment to them, but never gave it to them as a marking scheme.

The TeachersFirst resource (n.d.) states that “when shared with students prior to an assignment,

rubrics can be very motivational”, and I aim to achieve a similar effect there, without rubrics.

When it comes to process, I identify individual initiative as the component that becomes

considered in assessment, with flexibility also being exercised. A pupil may not be very

participative in class discussions, on a general level or in specific sessions, but still shows up to

each lesson and approaches me for 1:1 guidance. One student was unable to attend the first two

sessions (the half of the workshop which was held in-person, before pandemic lockdowns) but,

through catching up with her peers and maintaining correspondence with me, demonstrated

initiative in properly carrying out her process. This proved numerically redemptive when I

graded adhering to my criteria, as she passed the course and applied her learning.

The above is a demonstration of what I would initially aim for in the future, with regards

to assessment with rubrics in hand. There are paths for development in adjusting for each

activity, continuously analyzing how to reflect the desired standards, and further consideration of

‘creativity’, ‘flexibility’ and ‘individual initiative’. One important aspect, though, and which I’m

already attempting to do, is to displace focus on grades and rubrics towards the actual learning

(the projects and the process to those). This not only invites students to reflect about the value

and meaning in educating themselves and others, but also has the potential to free them towards

pursuing what they consider right to do in their learning, developing, hence, their criterion.
 5

References

Chapman, V., & Inman, D. (2009). A conundrum: rubrics or creativity/metacognitive

development? Educational Horizons. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ849020.pdf

Organization of American States. (2022). Knowledge-based Society. OAS.

https://www.oas.org/en/topics/knowledge_society.asp

TeachersFirst. (n.d.). Rubrics to the rescue: Rubric Pro and Con. TeachersFirst – Thinking

Teachers Teaching Thinkers. https://www.teachersfirst.com/lessons/rubrics/pro-and-

con.cfm