Re: Rethinking Rubrics

[Scott Hays <shays@ccwebster.net>]

On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:23 AM, aburke5054@aol.com
 wrote:

> The first chapter was pretty weak.  Rubrics are an efficient means of
> applying consistent scoring rules in large-scale assessments.  There's
> an important place for that.  Rubrics also have an important place in
> day-to-day lessons in the writing classroom, but there is clearly room
> for other things as well.  Ms Wilson seems confused about that.

I think I have finally discovered why we seem to disagree about so  
many things.

I think that learning (and its adjunct, teaching) is essentially an  
individual human endeavor.  It is messy.  It is subjective.  It does  
not take place in a linear fashion.  No one does it in exactly the  
same way, at the same time, or to the same depth or level.  It is  
difficult to accurately assess, and "grades" are -- at best -- an  
extrinsic reward more than a meaningful way to communicate depth and  
degree of learning (to students or to parents), or to encourage  
students to take responsibility for what they learn.  At worst,  
"grades" are nothing more than a system for ranking students against  
each other.

You seem to think of learning (and teaching) as something that can be  
standardized.  All kids can be expected to know the same thing(s) at  
the same time simply because they share a chronological age.  It can  
be assessed objectively and efficiently, and "grades" can be  
objectively determined and assigned in a meaningful way.

I think you are incorrect, but am always open to the idea that it is  
I who misunderstands things.

Scott Hays
shays@ccwebster.net

"Wrinkles only go where the smiles have been."
- - Jimmy Buffett