rubric for scoring essay questions

Rubric Best Practices, Examples, and Templates

A rubric is a scoring tool that identifies the different criteria relevant to an assignment, assessment, or learning outcome and states the possible levels of achievement in a specific, clear, and objective way. Use rubrics to assess project-based student work including essays, group projects, creative endeavors, and oral presentations.

Rubrics can help instructors communicate expectations to students and assess student work fairly, consistently and efficiently. Rubrics can provide students with informative feedback on their strengths and weaknesses so that they can reflect on their performance and work on areas that need improvement.

How to Get Started

Best practices, moodle how-to guides.

• Workshop Recording (Spring 2024)
• Workshop Registration

Step 1: Analyze the assignment

The first step in the rubric creation process is to analyze the assignment or assessment for which you are creating a rubric. To do this, consider the following questions:

• What is the purpose of the assignment and your feedback? What do you want students to demonstrate through the completion of this assignment (i.e. what are the learning objectives measured by it)? Is it a summative assessment, or will students use the feedback to create an improved product?
• Does the assignment break down into different or smaller tasks? Are these tasks equally important as the main assignment?
• What would an “excellent” assignment look like? An “acceptable” assignment? One that still needs major work?
• How detailed do you want the feedback you give students to be? Do you want/need to give them a grade?

Step 2: Decide what kind of rubric you will use

Types of rubrics: holistic, analytic/descriptive, single-point

Holistic Rubric. A holistic rubric includes all the criteria (such as clarity, organization, mechanics, etc.) to be considered together and included in a single evaluation. With a holistic rubric, the rater or grader assigns a single score based on an overall judgment of the student’s work, using descriptions of each performance level to assign the score.

Advantages of holistic rubrics:

• Can p lace an emphasis on what learners can demonstrate rather than what they cannot
• Save grader time by minimizing the number of evaluations to be made for each student
• Can be used consistently across raters, provided they have all been trained

Disadvantages of holistic rubrics:

• Provide less specific feedback than analytic/descriptive rubrics
• Can be difficult to choose a score when a student’s work is at varying levels across the criteria
• Any weighting of c riteria cannot be indicated in the rubric

Analytic/Descriptive Rubric . An analytic or descriptive rubric often takes the form of a table with the criteria listed in the left column and with levels of performance listed across the top row. Each cell contains a description of what the specified criterion looks like at a given level of performance. Each of the criteria is scored individually.

Advantages of analytic rubrics:

• Provide detailed feedback on areas of strength or weakness
• Each criterion can be weighted to reflect its relative importance

Disadvantages of analytic rubrics:

• More time-consuming to create and use than a holistic rubric
• May not be used consistently across raters unless the cells are well defined
• May result in giving less personalized feedback

Single-Point Rubric . A single-point rubric is breaks down the components of an assignment into different criteria, but instead of describing different levels of performance, only the “proficient” level is described. Feedback space is provided for instructors to give individualized comments to help students improve and/or show where they excelled beyond the proficiency descriptors.

Advantages of single-point rubrics:

• Easier to create than an analytic/descriptive rubric
• Perhaps more likely that students will read the descriptors
• Areas of concern and excellence are open-ended
• May removes a focus on the grade/points
• May increase student creativity in project-based assignments

Disadvantage of analytic rubrics: Requires more work for instructors writing feedback

Step 3 (Optional): Look for templates and examples.

You might Google, “Rubric for persuasive essay at the college level” and see if there are any publicly available examples to start from. Ask your colleagues if they have used a rubric for a similar assignment. Some examples are also available at the end of this article. These rubrics can be a great starting point for you, but consider steps 3, 4, and 5 below to ensure that the rubric matches your assignment description, learning objectives and expectations.

Step 4: Define the assignment criteria

Make a list of the knowledge and skills are you measuring with the assignment/assessment Refer to your stated learning objectives, the assignment instructions, past examples of student work, etc. for help.

  Helpful strategies for defining grading criteria:

• Collaborate with co-instructors, teaching assistants, and other colleagues
• Brainstorm and discuss with students
• Can they be observed and measured?
• Are they important and essential?
• Are they distinct from other criteria?
• Are they phrased in precise, unambiguous language?
• Revise the criteria as needed
• Consider whether some are more important than others, and how you will weight them.

Step 5: Design the rating scale

Most ratings scales include between 3 and 5 levels. Consider the following questions when designing your rating scale:

• Given what students are able to demonstrate in this assignment/assessment, what are the possible levels of achievement?
• How many levels would you like to include (more levels means more detailed descriptions)
• Will you use numbers and/or descriptive labels for each level of performance? (for example 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and/or Exceeds expectations, Accomplished, Proficient, Developing, Beginning, etc.)
• Don’t use too many columns, and recognize that some criteria can have more columns that others . The rubric needs to be comprehensible and organized. Pick the right amount of columns so that the criteria flow logically and naturally across levels.

Step 6: Write descriptions for each level of the rating scale

Artificial Intelligence tools like Chat GPT have proven to be useful tools for creating a rubric. You will want to engineer your prompt that you provide the AI assistant to ensure you get what you want. For example, you might provide the assignment description, the criteria you feel are important, and the number of levels of performance you want in your prompt. Use the results as a starting point, and adjust the descriptions as needed.

Building a rubric from scratch

For a single-point rubric , describe what would be considered “proficient,” i.e. B-level work, and provide that description. You might also include suggestions for students outside of the actual rubric about how they might surpass proficient-level work.

For analytic and holistic rubrics , c reate statements of expected performance at each level of the rubric.

• Consider what descriptor is appropriate for each criteria, e.g., presence vs absence, complete vs incomplete, many vs none, major vs minor, consistent vs inconsistent, always vs never. If you have an indicator described in one level, it will need to be described in each level.
• You might start with the top/exemplary level. What does it look like when a student has achieved excellence for each/every criterion? Then, look at the “bottom” level. What does it look like when a student has not achieved the learning goals in any way? Then, complete the in-between levels.
• For an analytic rubric , do this for each particular criterion of the rubric so that every cell in the table is filled. These descriptions help students understand your expectations and their performance in regard to those expectations.

Well-written descriptions:

• Describe observable and measurable behavior
• Use parallel language across the scale
• Indicate the degree to which the standards are met

Step 7: Create your rubric

Create your rubric in a table or spreadsheet in Word, Google Docs, Sheets, etc., and then transfer it by typing it into Moodle. You can also use online tools to create the rubric, but you will still have to type the criteria, indicators, levels, etc., into Moodle. Rubric creators: Rubistar , iRubric

Step 8: Pilot-test your rubric

Prior to implementing your rubric on a live course, obtain feedback from:

• Teacher assistants

Try out your new rubric on a sample of student work. After you pilot-test your rubric, analyze the results to consider its effectiveness and revise accordingly.

• Limit the rubric to a single page for reading and grading ease
• Use parallel language . Use similar language and syntax/wording from column to column. Make sure that the rubric can be easily read from left to right or vice versa.
• Use student-friendly language . Make sure the language is learning-level appropriate. If you use academic language or concepts, you will need to teach those concepts.
• Share and discuss the rubric with your students . Students should understand that the rubric is there to help them learn, reflect, and self-assess. If students use a rubric, they will understand the expectations and their relevance to learning.
• Consider scalability and reusability of rubrics. Create rubric templates that you can alter as needed for multiple assignments.
• Maximize the descriptiveness of your language. Avoid words like “good” and “excellent.” For example, instead of saying, “uses excellent sources,” you might describe what makes a resource excellent so that students will know. You might also consider reducing the reliance on quantity, such as a number of allowable misspelled words. Focus instead, for example, on how distracting any spelling errors are.

Example of an analytic rubric for a final paper

	Above Average (4)	Sufficient (3)	Developing (2)	Needs improvement (1)
(Thesis supported by relevant information and ideas	The central purpose of the student work is clear and supporting ideas always are always well-focused. Details are relevant, enrich the work.	The central purpose of the student work is clear and ideas are almost always focused in a way that supports the thesis. Relevant details illustrate the author’s ideas.	The central purpose of the student work is identified. Ideas are mostly focused in a way that supports the thesis.	The purpose of the student work is not well-defined. A number of central ideas do not support the thesis. Thoughts appear disconnected.
(Sequencing of elements/ ideas)	Information and ideas are presented in a logical sequence which flows naturally and is engaging to the audience.	Information and ideas are presented in a logical sequence which is followed by the reader with little or no difficulty.	Information and ideas are presented in an order that the audience can mostly follow.	Information and ideas are poorly sequenced. The audience has difficulty following the thread of thought.
(Correctness of grammar and spelling)	Minimal to no distracting errors in grammar and spelling.	The readability of the work is only slightly interrupted by spelling and/or grammatical errors.	Grammatical and/or spelling errors distract from the work.	The readability of the work is seriously hampered by spelling and/or grammatical errors.

Example of a holistic rubric for a final paper

The audience is able to easily identify the central message of the work and is engaged by the paper’s clear focus and relevant details. Information is presented logically and naturally. There are minimal to no distracting errors in grammar and spelling. : The audience is easily able to identify the focus of the student work which is supported by relevant ideas and supporting details. Information is presented in a logical manner that is easily followed. The readability of the work is only slightly interrupted by errors. : The audience can identify the central purpose of the student work without little difficulty and supporting ideas are present and clear. The information is presented in an orderly fashion that can be followed with little difficulty. Grammatical and spelling errors distract from the work. : The audience cannot clearly or easily identify the central ideas or purpose of the student work. Information is presented in a disorganized fashion causing the audience to have difficulty following the author’s ideas. The readability of the work is seriously hampered by errors.

Single-Point Rubric

Advanced (evidence of exceeding standards)	Criteria described a proficient level	Concerns (things that need work)
	Criteria #1: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #2: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #3: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
	Criteria #4: Description reflecting achievement of proficient level of performance
90-100 points	80-90 points	<80 points

More examples:

• Single Point Rubric Template ( variation )
• Analytic Rubric Template make a copy to edit
• A Rubric for Rubrics
• Bank of Online Discussion Rubrics in different formats
• Mathematical Presentations Descriptive Rubric
• Math Proof Assessment Rubric
• Kansas State Sample Rubrics
• Design Single Point Rubric

Technology Tools: Rubrics in Moodle

• Moodle Docs: Rubrics
• Moodle Docs: Grading Guide (use for single-point rubrics)

Tools with rubrics (other than Moodle)

• Google Assignments
• Turnitin Assignments: Rubric or Grading Form

Other resources

• DePaul University (n.d.). Rubrics .
• Gonzalez, J. (2014). Know your terms: Holistic, Analytic, and Single-Point Rubrics . Cult of Pedagogy.
• Goodrich, H. (1996). Understanding rubrics . Teaching for Authentic Student Performance, 54 (4), 14-17. Retrieved from   
• Miller, A. (2012). Tame the beast: tips for designing and using rubrics.
• Ragupathi, K., Lee, A. (2020). Beyond Fairness and Consistency in Grading: The Role of Rubrics in Higher Education. In: Sanger, C., Gleason, N. (eds) Diversity and Inclusion in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.

• Grades 6-12
• School Leaders

Have you seen our latest free teacher workshop?

15 Helpful Scoring Rubric Examples for All Grades and Subjects

In the end, they actually make grading easier.

When it comes to student assessment and evaluation, there are a lot of methods to consider. In some cases, testing is the best way to assess a student’s knowledge, and the answers are either right or wrong. But often, assessing a student’s performance is much less clear-cut. In these situations, a scoring rubric is often the way to go, especially if you’re using standards-based grading . Here’s what you need to know about this useful tool, along with lots of rubric examples to get you started.

What is a scoring rubric?

In the United States, a rubric is a guide that lays out the performance expectations for an assignment. It helps students understand what’s required of them, and guides teachers through the evaluation process. (Note that in other countries, the term “rubric” may instead refer to the set of instructions at the beginning of an exam. To avoid confusion, some people use the term “scoring rubric” instead.)

A rubric generally has three parts:

• Performance criteria: These are the various aspects on which the assignment will be evaluated. They should align with the desired learning outcomes for the assignment.
• Rating scale: This could be a number system (often 1 to 4) or words like “exceeds expectations, meets expectations, below expectations,” etc.
• Indicators: These describe the qualities needed to earn a specific rating for each of the performance criteria. The level of detail may vary depending on the assignment and the purpose of the rubric itself.

Rubrics take more time to develop up front, but they help ensure more consistent assessment, especially when the skills being assessed are more subjective. A well-developed rubric can actually save teachers a lot of time when it comes to grading. What’s more, sharing your scoring rubric with students in advance often helps improve performance . This way, students have a clear picture of what’s expected of them and what they need to do to achieve a specific grade or performance rating.

Learn more about why and how to use a rubric here.

Types of Rubric

There are three basic rubric categories, each with its own purpose.

Holistic Rubric

Source: Cambrian College

This type of rubric combines all the scoring criteria in a single scale. They’re quick to create and use, but they have drawbacks. If a student’s work spans different levels, it can be difficult to decide which score to assign. They also make it harder to provide feedback on specific aspects.

Traditional letter grades are a type of holistic rubric. So are the popular “hamburger rubric” and “ cupcake rubric ” examples. Learn more about holistic rubrics here.

Analytic Rubric

Source: University of Nebraska

Analytic rubrics are much more complex and generally take a great deal more time up front to design. They include specific details of the expected learning outcomes, and descriptions of what criteria are required to meet various performance ratings in each. Each rating is assigned a point value, and the total number of points earned determines the overall grade for the assignment.

Though they’re more time-intensive to create, analytic rubrics actually save time while grading. Teachers can simply circle or highlight any relevant phrases in each rating, and add a comment or two if needed. They also help ensure consistency in grading, and make it much easier for students to understand what’s expected of them.

Learn more about analytic rubrics here.

Developmental Rubric

Source: Deb’s Data Digest

A developmental rubric is a type of analytic rubric, but it’s used to assess progress along the way rather than determining a final score on an assignment. The details in these rubrics help students understand their achievements, as well as highlight the specific skills they still need to improve.

Developmental rubrics are essentially a subset of analytic rubrics. They leave off the point values, though, and focus instead on giving feedback using the criteria and indicators of performance.

Learn how to use developmental rubrics here.

Ready to create your own rubrics? Find general tips on designing rubrics here. Then, check out these examples across all grades and subjects to inspire you.

Elementary School Rubric Examples

These elementary school rubric examples come from real teachers who use them with their students. Adapt them to fit your needs and grade level.

Reading Fluency Rubric

You can use this one as an analytic rubric by counting up points to earn a final score, or just to provide developmental feedback. There’s a second rubric page available specifically to assess prosody (reading with expression).

Learn more: Teacher Thrive

Reading Comprehension Rubric

The nice thing about this rubric is that you can use it at any grade level, for any text. If you like this style, you can get a reading fluency rubric here too.

Learn more: Pawprints Resource Center

Written Response Rubric

Rubrics aren’t just for huge projects. They can also help kids work on very specific skills, like this one for improving written responses on assessments.

Learn more: Dianna Radcliffe: Teaching Upper Elementary and More

Interactive Notebook Rubric

If you use interactive notebooks as a learning tool , this rubric can help kids stay on track and meet your expectations.

Learn more: Classroom Nook

Project Rubric

Use this simple rubric as it is, or tweak it to include more specific indicators for the project you have in mind.

Learn more: Tales of a Title One Teacher

Behavior Rubric

Developmental rubrics are perfect for assessing behavior and helping students identify opportunities for improvement. Send these home regularly to keep parents in the loop.

Learn more: Teachers.net Gazette

Middle School Rubric Examples

In middle school, use rubrics to offer detailed feedback on projects, presentations, and more. Be sure to share them with students in advance, and encourage them to use them as they work so they’ll know if they’re meeting expectations.

Argumentative Writing Rubric

Argumentative writing is a part of language arts, social studies, science, and more. That makes this rubric especially useful.

Learn more: Dr. Caitlyn Tucker

Role-Play Rubric

Role-plays can be really useful when teaching social and critical thinking skills, but it’s hard to assess them. Try a rubric like this one to evaluate and provide useful feedback.

Learn more: A Question of Influence

Art Project Rubric

Art is one of those subjects where grading can feel very subjective. Bring some objectivity to the process with a rubric like this.

Source: Art Ed Guru

Diorama Project Rubric

You can use diorama projects in almost any subject, and they’re a great chance to encourage creativity. Simplify the grading process and help kids know how to make their projects shine with this scoring rubric.

Learn more: Historyourstory.com

Oral Presentation Rubric

Rubrics are terrific for grading presentations, since you can include a variety of skills and other criteria. Consider letting students use a rubric like this to offer peer feedback too.

Learn more: Bright Hub Education

High School Rubric Examples

In high school, it’s important to include your grading rubrics when you give assignments like presentations, research projects, or essays. Kids who go on to college will definitely encounter rubrics, so helping them become familiar with them now will help in the future.

Presentation Rubric

Analyze a student’s presentation both for content and communication skills with a rubric like this one. If needed, create a separate one for content knowledge with even more criteria and indicators.

Learn more: Michael A. Pena Jr.

Debate Rubric

Debate is a valuable learning tool that encourages critical thinking and oral communication skills. This rubric can help you assess those skills objectively.

Learn more: Education World

Project-Based Learning Rubric

Implementing project-based learning can be time-intensive, but the payoffs are worth it. Try this rubric to make student expectations clear and end-of-project assessment easier.

Learn more: Free Technology for Teachers

100-Point Essay Rubric

Need an easy way to convert a scoring rubric to a letter grade? This example for essay writing earns students a final score out of 100 points.

Learn more: Learn for Your Life

Drama Performance Rubric

If you’re unsure how to grade a student’s participation and performance in drama class, consider this example. It offers lots of objective criteria and indicators to evaluate.

Learn more: Chase March

How do you use rubrics in your classroom? Come share your thoughts and exchange ideas in the WeAreTeachers HELPLINE group on Facebook .

Plus, 25 of the best alternative assessment ideas ..

You Might Also Like

55+ Best Social Studies Websites for the Classroom

Don't you love it when other teachers do the research for us? Continue Reading

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved. 5335 Gate Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32256

Center for Excellence in Teaching

Home > Resources > Short essay question rubric

Short essay question rubric

Sample grading rubric an instructor can use to assess students’ work on short essay questions.

Download this file

Download this file [62.00 KB]

Back to Resources Page

Writing Rubrics [Examples, Best Practices, & Free Templates]

Writing rubrics are essential tools for teachers.

Rubrics can improve both teaching and learning. This guide will explain writing rubrics, their benefits, and how to create and use them effectively.

What Is a Writing Rubric?

Table of Contents

A writing rubric is a scoring guide used to evaluate written work.

It lists criteria and describes levels of quality from excellent to poor. Rubrics provide a standardized way to assess writing.

They make expectations clear and grading consistent.

Key Components of a Writing Rubric

• Criteria : Specific aspects of writing being evaluated (e.g., grammar, organization).
• Descriptors : Detailed descriptions of what each level of performance looks like.
• Scoring Levels : Typically, a range (e.g., 1-4 or 1-6) showing levels of mastery.

Example Breakdown

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
Grammar	No errors	Few minor errors	Several errors	Many errors
Organization	Clear and logical	Mostly clear	Somewhat clear	Not clear
Content	Thorough and insightful	Good, but not thorough	Basic, lacks insight	Incomplete or off-topic

Benefits of Using Writing Rubrics

Writing rubrics offer many advantages:

• Clarity : Rubrics clarify expectations for students. They know what is required for each level of performance.
• Consistency : Rubrics standardize grading. This ensures fairness and consistency across different students and assignments.
• Feedback : Rubrics provide detailed feedback. Students understand their strengths and areas for improvement.
• Efficiency : Rubrics streamline the grading process. Teachers can evaluate work more quickly and systematically.
• Self-Assessment : Students can use rubrics to self-assess. This promotes reflection and responsibility for their learning.

Examples of Writing Rubrics

Here are some examples of writing rubrics.

Narrative Writing Rubric

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
Story Elements	Well-developed	Developed, some details	Basic, missing details	Underdeveloped
Creativity	Highly creative	Creative	Some creativity	Lacks creativity
Grammar	No errors	Few minor errors	Several errors	Many errors
Organization	Clear and logical	Mostly clear	Somewhat clear	Not clear
Language Use	Rich and varied	Varied	Limited	Basic or inappropriate

Persuasive Writing Rubric

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
Argument	Strong and convincing	Convincing, some gaps	Basic, lacks support	Weak or unsupported
Evidence	Strong and relevant	Relevant, but not strong	Some relevant, weak	Irrelevant or missing
Grammar	No errors	Few minor errors	Several errors	Many errors
Organization	Clear and logical	Mostly clear	Somewhat clear	Not clear
Language Use	Persuasive and engaging	Engaging	Somewhat engaging	Not engaging

Best Practices for Creating Writing Rubrics

Let’s look at some best practices for creating useful writing rubrics.

1. Define Clear Criteria

Identify specific aspects of writing to evaluate. Be clear and precise.

The criteria should reflect the key components of the writing task. For example, for a narrative essay, criteria might include plot development, character depth, and use of descriptive language.

Clear criteria help students understand what is expected and allow teachers to provide targeted feedback.

Insider Tip : Collaborate with colleagues to establish consistent criteria across grade levels. This ensures uniformity in expectations and assessments.

2. Use Detailed Descriptors

Describe what each level of performance looks like.

This ensures transparency and clarity. Avoid vague language. Instead of saying “good,” describe what “good” entails. For example, “Few minor grammatical errors that do not impede readability.”

Detailed descriptors help students gauge their performance accurately.

Insider Tip : Use student work samples to illustrate each performance level. This provides concrete examples and helps students visualize expectations.

3. Involve Students

Involve students in the rubric creation process. This increases their understanding and buy-in.

Ask for their input on what they think is important in their writing.

This collaborative approach not only demystifies the grading process but also fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility in students.

Insider Tip : Conduct a workshop where students help create a rubric for an upcoming assignment. This interactive session can clarify doubts and make students more invested in their work.

4. Align with Objectives

Ensure the rubric aligns with learning objectives. This ensures relevance and focus.

If the objective is to enhance persuasive writing skills, the rubric should emphasize argument strength, evidence quality, and persuasive techniques.

Alignment ensures that the assessment directly supports instructional goals.

Insider Tip : Regularly revisit and update rubrics to reflect changes in curriculum and instructional priorities. This keeps the rubrics relevant and effective.

5. Review and Revise

Regularly review and revise rubrics. Ensure they remain accurate and effective.

Solicit feedback from students and colleagues. Continuous improvement of rubrics ensures they remain a valuable tool for both assessment and instruction.

Insider Tip : After using a rubric, take notes on its effectiveness. Were students confused by any criteria? Did the rubric cover all necessary aspects of the assignment? Use these observations to make adjustments.

6. Be Consistent

Use the rubric consistently across all assignments.

This ensures fairness and reliability. Consistency in applying the rubric helps build trust with students and maintains the integrity of the assessment process.

Insider Tip : Develop a grading checklist to accompany the rubric. This can help ensure that all criteria are consistently applied and none are overlooked during the grading process.

7. Provide Examples

Provide examples of each performance level.

This helps students understand expectations. Use annotated examples to show why a particular piece of writing meets a specific level.

This visual and practical demonstration can be more effective than descriptions alone.

Insider Tip : Create a portfolio of exemplar works for different assignments. This can be a valuable resource for both new and experienced teachers to standardize grading.

How to Use Writing Rubrics Effectively

Here is how to use writing rubrics like the pros.

1. Introduce Rubrics Early

Introduce rubrics at the beginning of the assignment.

Explain each criterion and performance level. This upfront clarity helps students understand what is expected and guides their work from the start.

Insider Tip : Conduct a rubric walkthrough session where you discuss each part of the rubric in detail. Allow students to ask questions and provide examples to illustrate each criterion.

2. Use Rubrics as a Teaching Tool

Use rubrics to teach writing skills. Discuss what constitutes good writing and why.

This can be an opportunity to reinforce lessons on grammar, organization, and other writing components.

Insider Tip : Pair the rubric with writing workshops. Use the rubric to critique sample essays and show students how to apply the rubric to improve their own writing.

3. Provide Feedback

Use the rubric to give detailed feedback. Highlight strengths and areas for improvement.

This targeted feedback helps students understand their performance and learn how to improve.

Insider Tip : Instead of just marking scores, add comments next to each criterion on the rubric. This personalized feedback can be more impactful and instructive for students.

4. Encourage Self-Assessment

Encourage students to use rubrics to self-assess.

This promotes reflection and growth. Before submitting their work, ask students to evaluate their own writing against the rubric.

This practice fosters self-awareness and critical thinking.

Insider Tip : Incorporate self-assessment as a mandatory step in the assignment process. Provide a simplified version of the rubric for students to use during self-assessment.

5. Use Rubrics for Peer Assessment

Use rubrics for peer assessment. This allows students to learn from each other.

Peer assessments can provide new perspectives and reinforce learning.

Insider Tip : Conduct a peer assessment workshop. Train students on how to use the rubric to evaluate each other’s work constructively. This can improve the quality of peer feedback.

6. Reflect and Improve

Reflect on the effectiveness of the rubric. Make adjustments as needed for future assignments.

Continuous reflection ensures that rubrics remain relevant and effective tools for assessment and learning.

Insider Tip : After an assignment, hold a debrief session with students to gather their feedback on the rubric. Use their insights to make improvements.

Check out this video about using writing rubrics:

Common Mistakes with Writing Rubrics

Creating and using writing rubrics can be incredibly effective, but there are common mistakes that can undermine their effectiveness.

Here are some pitfalls to avoid:

1. Vague Criteria

Vague criteria can confuse students and lead to inconsistent grading.

Ensure that each criterion is specific and clearly defined. Ambiguous terms like “good” or “satisfactory” should be replaced with concrete descriptions of what those levels of performance look like.

2. Overly Complex Rubrics

While detail is important, overly complex rubrics can be overwhelming for both students and teachers.

Too many criteria and performance levels can complicate the grading process and make it difficult for students to understand what is expected.

Keep rubrics concise and focused on the most important aspects of the assignment.

3. Inconsistent Application

Applying the rubric inconsistently can lead to unfair grading.

Ensure that you apply the rubric in the same way for all students and all assignments. Consistency builds trust and ensures that grades accurately reflect student performance.

4. Ignoring Student Input

Ignoring student input when creating rubrics can result in criteria that do not align with student understanding or priorities.

Involving students in the creation process can enhance their understanding and engagement with the rubric.

5. Failing to Update Rubrics

Rubrics should evolve to reflect changes in instructional goals and student needs.

Failing to update rubrics can result in outdated criteria that no longer align with current teaching objectives.

Regularly review and revise rubrics to keep them relevant and effective.

6. Lack of Examples

Without examples, students may struggle to understand the expectations for each performance level.

Providing annotated examples of work that meets each criterion can help students visualize what is required and guide their efforts more effectively.

7. Not Providing Feedback

Rubrics should be used as a tool for feedback, not just scoring.

Simply assigning a score without providing detailed feedback can leave students unclear about their strengths and areas for improvement.

Use the rubric to give comprehensive feedback that guides students’ growth.

8. Overlooking Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment

Self-assessment and peer assessment are valuable components of the learning process.

Overlooking these opportunities can limit students’ ability to reflect on their own work and learn from their peers.

Encourage students to use the rubric for self and peer assessment to deepen their understanding and enhance their skills.

What Is a Holistic Scoring Rubric for Writing?

A holistic scoring rubric for writing is a type of rubric that evaluates a piece of writing as a whole rather than breaking it down into separate criteria

This approach provides a single overall score based on the general impression of the writing’s quality and effectiveness.

Here’s a closer look at holistic scoring rubrics.

Key Features of Holistic Scoring Rubrics

• Single Overall Score : Assigns one score based on the overall quality of the writing.
• General Criteria : Focuses on the overall effectiveness, coherence, and impact of the writing.
• Descriptors : Uses broad descriptors for each score level to capture the general characteristics of the writing.

Example Holistic Scoring Rubric

Score	Description
5	: Exceptionally clear, engaging, and well-organized writing. Demonstrates excellent control of language, grammar, and style.
4	: Clear and well-organized writing. Minor errors do not detract from the overall quality. Demonstrates good control of language and style.
3	: Satisfactory writing with some organizational issues. Contains a few errors that may distract but do not impede understanding.
2	: Basic writing that lacks organization and contains several errors. Demonstrates limited control of language and style.
1	: Unclear and poorly organized writing. Contains numerous errors that impede understanding. Demonstrates poor control of language and style.

Advantages of Holistic Scoring Rubrics

• Efficiency : Faster to use because it involves a single overall judgment rather than multiple criteria.
• Flexibility : Allows for a more intuitive assessment of the writing’s overall impact and effectiveness.
• Comprehensiveness : Captures the overall quality of writing, considering all elements together.

Disadvantages of Holistic Scoring Rubrics

• Less Detailed Feedback : Provides a general score without specific feedback on individual aspects of writing.
• Subjectivity : Can be more subjective, as it relies on the assessor’s overall impression rather than specific criteria.
• Limited Diagnostic Use : Less useful for identifying specific areas of strength and weakness for instructional purposes.

When to Use Holistic Scoring Rubrics

• Quick Assessments : When a quick, overall evaluation is needed.
• Standardized Testing : Often used in standardized testing scenarios where consistency and efficiency are priorities.
• Initial Impressions : Useful for providing an initial overall impression before more detailed analysis.

Free Writing Rubric Templates

Feel free to use the following writing rubric templates.

You can easily copy and paste them into a Word Document. Please do credit this website on any written, printed, or published use.

Otherwise, go wild.

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
	Well-developed, engaging, and clear plot, characters, and setting.	Developed plot, characters, and setting with some details missing.	Basic plot, characters, and setting; lacks details.	Underdeveloped plot, characters, and setting.
	Highly creative and original.	Creative with some originality.	Some creativity but lacks originality.	Lacks creativity and originality.
	No grammatical errors.	Few minor grammatical errors.	Several grammatical errors.	Numerous grammatical errors.
	Clear and logical structure.	Mostly clear structure.	Somewhat clear structure.	Lacks clear structure.
	Rich, varied, and appropriate language.	Varied and appropriate language.	Limited language variety.	Basic or inappropriate language.

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
	Strong, clear, and convincing argument.	Convincing argument with minor gaps.	Basic argument; lacks strong support.	Weak or unsupported argument.
	Strong, relevant, and well-integrated evidence.	Relevant evidence but not strong.	Some relevant evidence, but weak.	Irrelevant or missing evidence.
	No grammatical errors.	Few minor grammatical errors.	Several grammatical errors.	Numerous grammatical errors.
	Clear and logical structure.	Mostly clear structure.	Somewhat clear structure.	Lacks clear structure.
	Persuasive and engaging language.	Engaging language.	Somewhat engaging language.	Not engaging language.

Expository Writing Rubric

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
	Thorough, accurate, and insightful content.	Accurate content with some details missing.	Basic content; lacks depth.	Incomplete or inaccurate content.
	Clear and concise explanations.	Mostly clear explanations.	Somewhat clear explanations.	Unclear explanations.
	No grammatical errors.	Few minor grammatical errors.	Several grammatical errors.	Numerous grammatical errors.
	Clear and logical structure.	Mostly clear structure.	Somewhat clear structure.	Lacks clear structure.
	Precise and appropriate language.	Appropriate language.	Limited language variety.	Basic or inappropriate language.

Descriptive Writing Rubric

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
	Vivid and detailed imagery that engages the senses.	Detailed imagery with minor gaps.	Basic imagery; lacks vivid details.	Little to no imagery.
	Highly creative and original descriptions.	Creative with some originality.	Some creativity but lacks originality.	Lacks creativity and originality.
	No grammatical errors.	Few minor grammatical errors.	Several grammatical errors.	Numerous grammatical errors.
	Clear and logical structure.	Mostly clear structure.	Somewhat clear structure.	Lacks clear structure.
	Rich, varied, and appropriate language.	Varied and appropriate language.	Limited language variety.	Basic or inappropriate language.

Analytical Writing Rubric

Criteria	4 (Excellent)	3 (Good)	2 (Fair)	1 (Poor)
	Insightful, thorough, and well-supported analysis.	Good analysis with some depth.	Basic analysis; lacks depth.	Weak or unsupported analysis.
	Strong, relevant, and well-integrated evidence.	Relevant evidence but not strong.	Some relevant evidence, but weak.	Irrelevant or missing evidence.
	No grammatical errors.	Few minor grammatical errors.	Several grammatical errors.	Numerous grammatical errors.
	Clear and logical structure.	Mostly clear structure.	Somewhat clear structure.	Lacks clear structure.
	Precise and appropriate language.	Appropriate language.	Limited language variety.	Basic or inappropriate language.

Final Thoughts: Writing Rubrics

I have a lot more resources for teaching on this site.

Check out some of the blog posts I’ve listed below. I think you might enjoy them.

Read This Next:

• Narrative Writing Graphic Organizer [Guide + Free Templates]
• 100 Best A Words for Kids (+ How to Use Them)
• 100 Best B Words For Kids (+How to Teach Them)
• 100 Dictation Word Ideas for Students and Kids
• 50 Tricky Words to Pronounce and Spell (How to Teach Them)

• What is the Praxis?
• What's Tested on the Praxis Writing Test?
• What's Tested on the Praxis Reading Test?
• What's Tested on the Praxis Mathematics Test?
• What's Tested on the Praxis Principles of Learning and Teaching Test?
• What's Tested on the Praxis Elementary Education Content Knowledge Test?
• What's Tested on the Praxis Elementary Education: Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Test?
• Praxis Reading Practice Questions
• Praxis Writing Practice Questions
• Praxis Mathematics Practice Questions
• Praxis Elementary Education Content Knowledge Practice Questions
• Praxis Elementary Education: Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Practice Questions
• Praxis PLT: K-6 Practice Questions
• Praxis PLT: Grades 5-9 Practice Questions
• Praxis PLT: Grades 7-12 Practice Questions
• Praxis Prep Courses

Ultimate Guide to the Praxis Essay Scoring Rubric

Scoring rubric for the praxis argumentative essay.

• Has a clear thesis
• Is well organized and developed with strong connections between ideas
• Includes thoughtfully chosen reasons, examples, or details that support the main idea
• Demonstrates variety in sentence structure
• Demonstrates a command of the English language
• Contains few (if any) errors in grammar and usage
• Is organized and developed with connections between ideas
• Includes reasons, examples, or details that support the main idea
• Demonstrates some variety in sentence structure
• Demonstrates competence in the English language
• Contains few errors in grammar and usage
• Has a thesis
• Is organized and developed
• Includes some reasons, examples, or details that support the main idea
• Is generally free of grammar/usage errors
• Only weakly develops its thesis
• Needs more organization and development
• Includes reasons, examples, or details that are not adequate to support the main idea
• Contains several errors in grammar/usage
• Does not clearly define its thesis
• Lacks organization and development
• Fails to include enough reasons, examples, or details
• Commits several serious errors in language, grammar, usage, and/or mechanics
• Has serious writing errors that detract from understanding the ideas; or
• is not coherent; or
• is almost completely lacking in development.

Scoring Rubric for the Praxis Source Text Essay

• Explains well why the concerns are important with supportive examples, reasons, and details that tie the two sources together
• Includes information from both sources to explain the pertinent issues in the texts and cites the sources when paraphrasing or quoting
• Explains why the concerns are important with supportive examples, reasons, and details that tie the two sources together
• Explains why the concerns are important with examples, reasons, and details that touch on both sources
• Only weakly develops explanations of the importance of the concerns
• Works with only one source or does not adequately cover both sources
• Uses reasons, examples, or details that are not adequate to support the main idea
• Commits several errors in grammar/usage
• Fails to consistently cite the sources
• Does not demonstrate understanding of the importance of the concerns
• Works with only one source
• Does not cite the sources even when paraphrasing or quoting
• Is not coherent; or

Looking for more prep? Kaplan has the Praxis Test Prep & Practice Resources for you.

[  INTERESTED IN WHAT’S TESTED ON ALL PRAXIS TESTS?  ↓  ]

• Praxis  Mathematics  Test
• Praxis  Reading  Test
• Praxis  Writing  Test
• Praxis  Elementary Education Content Knowledge  Test

You might also like

Call 1-800-KAP-TEST or email [email protected]

Prep for an Exam

MCAT Test Prep

LSAT Test Prep

GRE Test Prep

GMAT Test Prep

SAT Test Prep

ACT Test Prep

DAT Test Prep

NCLEX Test Prep

USMLE Test Prep

Courses by Location

NCLEX Locations

GRE Locations

SAT Locations

LSAT Locations

MCAT Locations

GMAT Locations

Useful Links

Kaplan Test Prep Contact Us Partner Solutions Work for Kaplan Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy CA Privacy Policy Trademark Directory

• Faculty and Staff

Assessment and Curriculum Support Center

Creating and using rubrics.

Last Updated: 4 March 2024. Click here to view archived versions of this page.

On this page:

• What is a rubric?
• Why use a rubric?
• What are the parts of a rubric?
• Developing a rubric
• Sample rubrics
• Scoring rubric group orientation and calibration
• Suggestions for using rubrics in courses
• Equity-minded considerations for rubric development
• Tips for developing a rubric
• Additional resources & sources consulted

Note:  The information and resources contained here serve only as a primers to the exciting and diverse perspectives in the field today. This page will be continually updated to reflect shared understandings of equity-minded theory and practice in learning assessment.

1. What is a rubric?

A rubric is an assessment tool often shaped like a matrix, which describes levels of achievement in a specific area of performance, understanding, or behavior.

There are two main types of rubrics:

Analytic Rubric : An analytic rubric specifies at least two characteristics to be assessed at each performance level and provides a separate score for each characteristic (e.g., a score on “formatting” and a score on “content development”).

• Advantages: provides more detailed feedback on student performance; promotes consistent scoring across students and between raters
• Disadvantages: more time consuming than applying a holistic rubric
• You want to see strengths and weaknesses.
• You want detailed feedback about student performance.

Holistic Rubric: A holistic rubrics provide a single score based on an overall impression of a student’s performance on a task.

• Advantages: quick scoring; provides an overview of student achievement; efficient for large group scoring
• Disadvantages: does not provided detailed information; not diagnostic; may be difficult for scorers to decide on one overall score
• You want a quick snapshot of achievement.
• A single dimension is adequate to define quality.

2. Why use a rubric?

• A rubric creates a common framework and language for assessment.
• Complex products or behaviors can be examined efficiently.
• Well-trained reviewers apply the same criteria and standards.
• Rubrics are criterion-referenced, rather than norm-referenced. Raters ask, “Did the student meet the criteria for level 5 of the rubric?” rather than “How well did this student do compared to other students?”
• Using rubrics can lead to substantive conversations among faculty.
• When faculty members collaborate to develop a rubric, it promotes shared expectations and grading practices.

Faculty members can use rubrics for program assessment. Examples:

The English Department collected essays from students in all sections of English 100. A random sample of essays was selected. A team of faculty members evaluated the essays by applying an analytic scoring rubric. Before applying the rubric, they “normed”–that is, they agreed on how to apply the rubric by scoring the same set of essays and discussing them until consensus was reached (see below: “6. Scoring rubric group orientation and calibration”). Biology laboratory instructors agreed to use a “Biology Lab Report Rubric” to grade students’ lab reports in all Biology lab sections, from 100- to 400-level. At the beginning of each semester, instructors met and discussed sample lab reports. They agreed on how to apply the rubric and their expectations for an “A,” “B,” “C,” etc., report in 100-level, 200-level, and 300- and 400-level lab sections. Every other year, a random sample of students’ lab reports are selected from 300- and 400-level sections. Each of those reports are then scored by a Biology professor. The score given by the course instructor is compared to the score given by the Biology professor. In addition, the scores are reported as part of the program’s assessment report. In this way, the program determines how well it is meeting its outcome, “Students will be able to write biology laboratory reports.”

3. What are the parts of a rubric?

Rubrics are composed of four basic parts. In its simplest form, the rubric includes:

• A task description . The outcome being assessed or instructions students received for an assignment.
• The characteristics to be rated (rows) . The skills, knowledge, and/or behavior to be demonstrated.
• Beginning, approaching, meeting, exceeding
• Emerging, developing, proficient, exemplary 
• Novice, intermediate, intermediate high, advanced 
• Beginning, striving, succeeding, soaring
• Also called a “performance description.” Explains what a student will have done to demonstrate they are at a given level of mastery for a given characteristic.

4. Developing a rubric

Step 1: Identify what you want to assess

Step 2: Identify the characteristics to be rated (rows). These are also called “dimensions.”

• Specify the skills, knowledge, and/or behaviors that you will be looking for.
• Limit the characteristics to those that are most important to the assessment.

Step 3: Identify the levels of mastery/scale (columns).

Tip: Aim for an even number (4 or 6) because when an odd number is used, the middle tends to become the “catch-all” category.

Step 4: Describe each level of mastery for each characteristic/dimension (cells).

• Describe the best work you could expect using these characteristics. This describes the top category.
• Describe an unacceptable product. This describes the lowest category.
• Develop descriptions of intermediate-level products for intermediate categories.

Important: Each description and each characteristic should be mutually exclusive.

Step 5: Test rubric.

• Apply the rubric to an assignment.
• Share with colleagues.

Tip: Faculty members often find it useful to establish the minimum score needed for the student work to be deemed passable. For example, faculty members may decided that a “1” or “2” on a 4-point scale (4=exemplary, 3=proficient, 2=marginal, 1=unacceptable), does not meet the minimum quality expectations. We encourage a standard setting session to set the score needed to meet expectations (also called a “cutscore”). Monica has posted materials from standard setting workshops, one offered on campus and the other at a national conference (includes speaker notes with the presentation slides). They may set their criteria for success as 90% of the students must score 3 or higher. If assessment study results fall short, action will need to be taken.

Step 6: Discuss with colleagues. Review feedback and revise.

Important: When developing a rubric for program assessment, enlist the help of colleagues. Rubrics promote shared expectations and consistent grading practices which benefit faculty members and students in the program.

5. Sample rubrics

Rubrics are on our Rubric Bank page and in our Rubric Repository (Graduate Degree Programs) . More are available at the Assessment and Curriculum Support Center in Crawford Hall (hard copy).

These open as Word documents and are examples from outside UH.

• Group Participation (analytic rubric)
• Participation (holistic rubric)
• Design Project (analytic rubric)
• Critical Thinking (analytic rubric)
• Media and Design Elements (analytic rubric; portfolio)
• Writing (holistic rubric; portfolio)

6. Scoring rubric group orientation and calibration

When using a rubric for program assessment purposes, faculty members apply the rubric to pieces of student work (e.g., reports, oral presentations, design projects). To produce dependable scores, each faculty member needs to interpret the rubric in the same way. The process of training faculty members to apply the rubric is called “norming.” It’s a way to calibrate the faculty members so that scores are accurate and consistent across the faculty. Below are directions for an assessment coordinator carrying out this process.

Suggested materials for a scoring session:

• Copies of the rubric
• Copies of the “anchors”: pieces of student work that illustrate each level of mastery. Suggestion: have 6 anchor pieces (2 low, 2 middle, 2 high)
• Score sheets
• Extra pens, tape, post-its, paper clips, stapler, rubber bands, etc.

Hold the scoring session in a room that:

• Allows the scorers to spread out as they rate the student pieces
• Has a chalk or white board, smart board, or flip chart
• Describe the purpose of the activity, stressing how it fits into program assessment plans. Explain that the purpose is to assess the program, not individual students or faculty, and describe ethical guidelines, including respect for confidentiality and privacy.
• Describe the nature of the products that will be reviewed, briefly summarizing how they were obtained.
• Describe the scoring rubric and its categories. Explain how it was developed.
• Analytic: Explain that readers should rate each dimension of an analytic rubric separately, and they should apply the criteria without concern for how often each score (level of mastery) is used. Holistic: Explain that readers should assign the score or level of mastery that best describes the whole piece; some aspects of the piece may not appear in that score and that is okay. They should apply the criteria without concern for how often each score is used.
• Give each scorer a copy of several student products that are exemplars of different levels of performance. Ask each scorer to independently apply the rubric to each of these products, writing their ratings on a scrap sheet of paper.
• Once everyone is done, collect everyone’s ratings and display them so everyone can see the degree of agreement. This is often done on a blackboard, with each person in turn announcing his/her ratings as they are entered on the board. Alternatively, the facilitator could ask raters to raise their hands when their rating category is announced, making the extent of agreement very clear to everyone and making it very easy to identify raters who routinely give unusually high or low ratings.
• Guide the group in a discussion of their ratings. There will be differences. This discussion is important to establish standards. Attempt to reach consensus on the most appropriate rating for each of the products being examined by inviting people who gave different ratings to explain their judgments. Raters should be encouraged to explain by making explicit references to the rubric. Usually consensus is possible, but sometimes a split decision is developed, e.g., the group may agree that a product is a “3-4” split because it has elements of both categories. This is usually not a problem. You might allow the group to revise the rubric to clarify its use but avoid allowing the group to drift away from the rubric and learning outcome(s) being assessed.
• Once the group is comfortable with how the rubric is applied, the rating begins. Explain how to record ratings using the score sheet and explain the procedures. Reviewers begin scoring.
• Are results sufficiently reliable?
• What do the results mean? Are we satisfied with the extent of students’ learning?
• Who needs to know the results?
• What are the implications of the results for curriculum, pedagogy, or student support services?
• How might the assessment process, itself, be improved?

7. Suggestions for using rubrics in courses

• Use the rubric to grade student work. Hand out the rubric with the assignment so students will know your expectations and how they’ll be graded. This should help students master your learning outcomes by guiding their work in appropriate directions.
• Use a rubric for grading student work and return the rubric with the grading on it. Faculty save time writing extensive comments; they just circle or highlight relevant segments of the rubric. Some faculty members include room for additional comments on the rubric page, either within each section or at the end.
• Develop a rubric with your students for an assignment or group project. Students can the monitor themselves and their peers using agreed-upon criteria that they helped develop. Many faculty members find that students will create higher standards for themselves than faculty members would impose on them.
• Have students apply your rubric to sample products before they create their own. Faculty members report that students are quite accurate when doing this, and this process should help them evaluate their own projects as they are being developed. The ability to evaluate, edit, and improve draft documents is an important skill.
• Have students exchange paper drafts and give peer feedback using the rubric. Then, give students a few days to revise before submitting the final draft to you. You might also require that they turn in the draft and peer-scored rubric with their final paper.
• Have students self-assess their products using the rubric and hand in their self-assessment with the product; then, faculty members and students can compare self- and faculty-generated evaluations.

8. Equity-minded considerations for rubric development

Ensure transparency by making rubric criteria public, explicit, and accessible

Transparency is a core tenet of equity-minded assessment practice. Students should know and understand how they are being evaluated as early as possible.

• Ensure the rubric is publicly available & easily accessible. We recommend publishing on your program or department website.
• Have course instructors introduce and use the program rubric in their own courses. Instructors should explain to students connections between the rubric criteria and the course and program SLOs.
• Write rubric criteria using student-focused and culturally-relevant language to ensure students understand the rubric’s purpose, the expectations it sets, and how criteria will be applied in assessing their work.
• For example, instructors can provide annotated examples of student work using the rubric language as a resource for students.

Meaningfully involve students and engage multiple perspectives

Rubrics created by faculty alone risk perpetuating unseen biases as the evaluation criteria used will inherently reflect faculty perspectives, values, and assumptions. Including students and other stakeholders in developing criteria helps to ensure performance expectations are aligned between faculty, students, and community members. Additional perspectives to be engaged might include community members, alumni, co-curricular faculty/staff, field supervisors, potential employers, or current professionals. Consider the following strategies to meaningfully involve students and engage multiple perspectives:

• Have students read each evaluation criteria and talk out loud about what they think it means. This will allow you to identify what language is clear and where there is still confusion.
• Ask students to use their language to interpret the rubric and provide a student version of the rubric.
• If you use this strategy, it is essential to create an inclusive environment where students and faculty have equal opportunity to provide input.
• Be sure to incorporate feedback from faculty and instructors who teach diverse courses, levels, and in different sub-disciplinary topics. Faculty and instructors who teach introductory courses have valuable experiences and perspectives that may differ from those who teach higher-level courses.
• Engage multiple perspectives including co-curricular faculty/staff, alumni, potential employers, and community members for feedback on evaluation criteria and rubric language. This will ensure evaluation criteria reflect what is important for all stakeholders.
• Elevate historically silenced voices in discussions on rubric development. Ensure stakeholders from historically underrepresented communities have their voices heard and valued.

Honor students’ strengths in performance descriptions

When describing students’ performance at different levels of mastery, use language that describes what students can do rather than what they cannot do. For example:

• Instead of: Students cannot make coherent arguments consistently.
• Use: Students can make coherent arguments occasionally.

9. Tips for developing a rubric

• Find and adapt an existing rubric! It is rare to find a rubric that is exactly right for your situation, but you can adapt an already existing rubric that has worked well for others and save a great deal of time. A faculty member in your program may already have a good one.
• Evaluate the rubric . Ask yourself: A) Does the rubric relate to the outcome(s) being assessed? (If yes, success!) B) Does it address anything extraneous? (If yes, delete.) C) Is the rubric useful, feasible, manageable, and practical? (If yes, find multiple ways to use the rubric: program assessment, assignment grading, peer review, student self assessment.)
• Collect samples of student work that exemplify each point on the scale or level. A rubric will not be meaningful to students or colleagues until the anchors/benchmarks/exemplars are available.
• Expect to revise.
• When you have a good rubric, SHARE IT!

10. Additional resources & sources consulted:

Rubric examples:

• Rubrics primarily for undergraduate outcomes and programs
• Rubric repository for graduate degree programs

Workshop presentation slides and handouts:

• Workshop handout (Word document)
• How to Use a Rubric for Program Assessment (2010)
• Techniques for Using Rubrics in Program Assessment by guest speaker Dannelle Stevens (2010)
• Rubrics: Save Grading Time & Engage Students in Learning by guest speaker Dannelle Stevens (2009)
• Rubric Library , Institutional Research, Assessment & Planning, California State University-Fresno
• The Basics of Rubrics [PDF], Schreyer Institute, Penn State
• Creating Rubrics , Teaching Methods and Management, TeacherVision
• Allen, Mary – University of Hawai’i at Manoa Spring 2008 Assessment Workshops, May 13-14, 2008 [available at the Assessment and Curriculum Support Center]
• Mertler, Craig A. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation , 7(25).
• NPEC Sourcebook on Assessment: Definitions and Assessment Methods for Communication, Leadership, Information Literacy, Quantitative Reasoning, and Quantitative Skills . [PDF] (June 2005)

Contributors: Monica Stitt-Bergh, Ph.D., TJ Buckley, Yao Z. Hill Ph.D.

Essay Rubric

About this printout

This rubric delineates specific expectations about an essay assignment to students and provides a means of assessing completed student essays.

Teaching with this printout

More ideas to try.

Grading rubrics can be of great benefit to both you and your students. For you, a rubric saves time and decreases subjectivity. Specific criteria are explicitly stated, facilitating the grading process and increasing your objectivity. For students, the use of grading rubrics helps them to meet or exceed expectations, to view the grading process as being “fair,” and to set goals for future learning. In order to help your students meet or exceed expectations of the assignment, be sure to discuss the rubric with your students when you assign an essay. It is helpful to show them examples of written pieces that meet and do not meet the expectations. As an added benefit, because the criteria are explicitly stated, the use of the rubric decreases the likelihood that students will argue about the grade they receive. The explicitness of the expectations helps students know exactly why they lost points on the assignment and aids them in setting goals for future improvement.

• Routinely have students score peers’ essays using the rubric as the assessment tool. This increases their level of awareness of the traits that distinguish successful essays from those that fail to meet the criteria. Have peer editors use the Reviewer’s Comments section to add any praise, constructive criticism, or questions.
• Alter some expectations or add additional traits on the rubric as needed. Students’ needs may necessitate making more rigorous criteria for advanced learners or less stringent guidelines for younger or special needs students. Furthermore, the content area for which the essay is written may require some alterations to the rubric. In social studies, for example, an essay about geographical landforms and their effect on the culture of a region might necessitate additional criteria about the use of specific terminology.
• After you and your students have used the rubric, have them work in groups to make suggested alterations to the rubric to more precisely match their needs or the parameters of a particular writing assignment.
• Print this resource

Explore Resources by Grade

• Kindergarten K

• help_outline help

iRubric: Scoring Rubric for Essay Questions

      '; }         delete   Do more...

Rubric Code: By Ready to use Public Rubric Subject:    Type:    Grade Levels: K-5

Short Answer Test Assessment Rubric

• Communication

How To Use The New AP® English Scoring Rubric

Last summer, the major changes for the 2019-2020 school year across AP ® courses included a) new unit structures aligned to key course skills, b) teachers gained access to more resources through the launch of AP ® Classroom, and c) many exams underwent major changes. All of these changes were meant to better support AP ® students and teachers in their preparation for – and success on – the May AP ® exams.

Teachers of AP ® English Language and Composition and AP ® English Literature and Composition experienced one of the most significant changes: the introduction of a new analytic rubric for each exam’s Free Response Questions. This new rubric takes the place of the nine-point holistic rubric that has been in use for 20 years.

P.S. Based on feedback from teachers, the College Board made a few final tweaks to the rubrics, which they released on September 30, 2019 . Those changes helped clarify some parts of the rubric. They also released 10 scored student samples for each question of 2018 and 2019 with scoring commentaries!

Using the New AP ® English Rubric With Confidence

Such a significant change can be daunting. If you’ve felt less than prepared to use the new rubrics in your class, the good news is there are major benefits with the new approach.

We’ve been trying it out ourselves – scoring hundreds of previously released student samples alongside a team of expert College Board readers – and we believe the new rubric makes it easier to communicate and teach. That’s exciting news for teachers and students.

The analytic style of this rubric offers clearer direct measures of success. In each scoring category, there are technical requirements to meet, which makes expectations clearer for students and evaluation easier for teachers.

Plus, while development and analysis have always been critical to success on AP ® English work, this rubric offers a more visible focus on evidence and commentary – as well as clarification of exactly what this means.

“There are two aspects of the new rubric I liked most. The first is the analytical nature of the rubric. Since the categories are broken down into three distinct sections, it is easier to consider each portion of this score separately.

Second, i found the new rubric particularly thorough in its explanation. each reporting category clarified what types of responses would or would not earn a specific score for that category. the explanations were more focused and clearer for their descriptions.”, — michael stracco, ap ® english literature reader.

Being big fans of rubrics of all types, but especially analytic rubrics, Marco Learning is here to help. In this post, we break down the big changes and dig into the new rubrics that will be used to evaluate Free Response Questions starting with the May 2020 exams.

Here’s what we will cover in this post:

• Anatomy of the new rubric
• How to use the “decision rules” for scoring
• Implications for teaching
• How to share the new rubric with your students

Anatomy of the New Rubric

While essays were previously graded on a holistic scale of 0 to 9, reflecting overall quality, the College Board has switched to an analytic rubric, which evaluates student success out of 6 possible points across three scoring categories. The three scoring categories are:

• Thesis (1 point possible)
• Evidence and Commentary (4 points possible)
• Sophistication (1 point possible)

Linguistic change! If you’re familiar with the old rubric, you’ll notice a new word choice right away. The new rubric refers to commentary instead of analysis. We perceive this change to be more student friendly, in that it encompasses a broader range of student engagement with the text — rather than simply analyzing the technical aspects of the text/argument, students are encouraged to integrate commentary on important background elements of the text/argument!

Each of these “reporting categories” contains specific requirements that students must meet in order to earn points. The student’s identification and use of evidence continues to be weighted most heavily, with four of the six available points falling within the Evidence and Commentary reporting category.

Here are the core elements of the Synthesis Essay in AP ® English Language:

How do the rubrics vary by course and/or essay type?

• The scoring criteria for Thesis are nearly identical for all six essay types, with a slight modification for AP ® Literature to add that a student’s thesis must “present an interpretation” of the text in question.
• The Evidence and Commentary scoring criteria have slight variations to address the source of evidence that corresponds to each essay type.
• The Sophistication scoring criteria are identical across courses and all essay types.

Decision Rules for Scoring

In addition to the basic rubric scoring criteria, the College Board provides helpful “decision rules” for how to apply the criteria more specifically. Notably, these rules vary by essay type.

Access the complete College Board (and revised ) rubrics with the decision rules here:

AP ® English Language

• Q1: Synthesis Essay
• Q2: Rhetorical Analysis
• Q3: Argument Essay

AP ® English Literature

• Q1: Poetry Analysis
• Q2: Prose Fiction Analysis
• Q3: Literary Argument

Applying the Rubric to Student Samples

Many teachers will want to continue to use released exams for student practice (available on the College Board website: AP ® English Language , AP ® English Literature ).

Here’s how to apply the new rubric to your students’ practice timed writings.

Not only is the thesis a vital part of effective written work, it is now a scoring category for AP ® English essays – an explicit requirement. In each essay, students should “respond to the prompt with a thesis that presents a defensible position/interpretation” (the object here varies slightly depending on the question type). Understandably, this must take a position and should go beyond merely restating the prompt or summarizing source texts.

AP ® English Language Argument Essay: Thesis Category

Pay special attention to the “additional notes” at the bottom:

First, a thesis located anywhere in the essay may earn the point. While it is typically not good practice for a student to bury their thesis in a conclusion paragraph (because the clarity of their argument may be impacted), a successful concluding thesis would earn the point. When the thesis is not obviously placed in its traditional spot at the end of an introductory paragraph, read closely in case a clear position in response to the prompt is hiding later in the essay.

Second, a thesis may earn a point even if the rest of the response does not support the same line of reasoning . The thesis is evaluated entirely independently from the successful development of the argument.

What changed about THESIS in the revised rubrics?

• Having a defensible position or interpretation (depending on essay type) matters, but the language around “establishing a line of reasoning” has been removed.
• Students are not expected to use the thesis to outline their essay. There have been a few scoring notes added, such as that the thesis does not necessarily need to be a single sentence, but the separate sentences need to be in close proximity.

B) EVIDENCE AND COMMENTARY

Worth 4 of the possible 6 points, the Evidence and Commentary category carries the weight of the new rubric. While the source of the evidence varies by essay type, regardless of prompt, students are asked to provide evidence for their position and expand on it with commentary that connects the evidence to their position.

Each rubric’s decision rules include descriptions of “typical” responses that fall into each score level. These descriptions will help you decide how to score a response, but may still prove challenging since you’ll still need to determine how successful a student’s explanation is and where that places it on the rubric.

AP ® English Language Argument Essay: Evidence and Commentary Category

As our team of AP ® readers have practiced applying these rules, we have had the most difficulty determining what meets the level of “explanation” in the expectations of the AP ® Language Argument Essay rubric. If a student has provided explanation for their evidence, but not very successfully, for example, they may still be eligible for a score of 3 in this category. This might seem a bit high if you’re oriented to the rigor of the old holistic rubric, but as we’ll explain more below, you’ll need to move away from thinking in terms of the rigor of the old rubric or thinking of essays as “high” or “low.”

If you’re on the fence about a point, we recommend falling back to the classic guidance to reward students for what they do well , particularly in this scoring category. While that specific language has not persisted to this new rubric, based on what we know now, we expect it to persist as a value in College Board scoring on exams.

Note: An essay that does NOT earn the Thesis point is highly unlikely to earn 3 or 4 points in Evidence and Commentary. These higher scores require a clear connection between thesis and evidence.

What changed about EVIDENCE & COMMENTARY in the revised rubrics?

• Compared to the initial version, the College Board made a helpful structural change: Evidence and Commentary are now discussed independently within the scoring criteria.
• There is now more focus on supporting all claims for scores of 3 or 4 rather than simply providing examples or evidence that may not be totally successfully linked back to a claim.

C) SOPHISTICATION

We’ve found the Sophistication component requires the most group norming. There are 3-4 “ways” students might demonstrate sophistication of thought listed in the scoring notes, but the scoring criterion is king: the response must, above all, “demonstrate sophistication of thought and/or a complex understanding of the rhetorical situation.”

As noted in the rubric, sophistication must be part of the argument , not a passing phrase or reference. While it might be easy to coach students to fulfill one or more of the strategies (“check the box”), it will be very difficult for students to successfully earn the point.

What changed about SOPHISTICATION in the revised rubrics?

• The College Board has fine-tuned to the decision rules for this point. It is now more clear that this point is very rigorous.
• There are fewer examples of possible strategies (now 3-4 versus 5-6), notably removing “Utilizing a prose style that is appropriate to the student’s argument”.

Teacher tip: The ways a student might demonstrate sophistication may not be obvious for them to include in a response (e.g., using relevant analogies to help an audience better understand an interpretation or discussing alternative interpretations of a text). While we don’t recommend encouraging your students to incorporate the listed strategies to “check the box,” we do recommend encouraging them to be creative in their engagement with the text. And look to these descriptors for teaching ideas!

Avoid These Common Scoring Mistakes

Make sure your scoring is focused on the core areas of the AP ® rubric and doesn’t get caught up by any of these common scoring mistakes.

• Don’t focus on grammar and mechanics. These aspects of writing are relatively unimportant in scoring. However, if grammatical and/or mechanical errors are so frequent and significant that they interfere with your understanding of the essay, the student is ineligible for the fourth point in the Evidence and Commentary reporting category. It is, however, rare to see this level of technical writing errors in a high-scoring essay.
• Don’t penalize for “missing” conclusions. While they do make for “nicer” writing, conclusion paragraphs are usually brief and are not actually required in this exam! A student’s conclusion (or the lack of one) is not weighted in the score.
• Don’t be fooled by flowery writing! Sometimes, a student may write with sophisticated style or flowery language, but fail to adequately analyze evidence or support their argument. While these essays might sound nice, they don’t achieve the main goals of AP ® assignments — namely, the development and analysis of evidence in support of a relevant argument. If an essay is written extremely well on the surface, take a moment to consider whether it meets the assignment goals or if sophisticated styling is masking a lack of analysis. Make sure the specific scoring categories guide your evaluation of each student’s essay!
• Be careful not to compare the new analytic scoring with the old holistic scores. If you’re very familiar with the 9-point holistic rubric, you may be tempted to continue to consider essays in terms of their success on the old rubric, but the new analytic rubric requires a shift in thinking. Try not to compare the overall scores of students to each other (an overall score of 3 for two students might reflect success in different scoring categories, for example), and be careful about calibrating to past released student samples that were scored on the old scale.

“I believe that the main challenge with the new rubrics is developing a different mindset from the previous holistic scoring. The one for me that seemed most difficult to discard was seeing an essay as either an upper level or a lower level essay. The new rubric discourages such thinking, which many of us experienced scorers often relied upon when first reading through an essay.”

Implications for Teaching

We asked Michael Stracco, a long-time English teacher with sixteen years experience as a College Board reader for the AP ® Literature and Composition course, for his advice for teachers when guiding students on the new rubric.

What advice would you give to teachers when guiding students on the new rubric?

Any rubric is going to be a bit formulaic when it comes to preparing students. To the degree that the rubric describes good writing, this new rubric is clearly good teaching of writing. For example, the descriptors of a good thesis sentence are excellent. A teacher would do well to teach a student how to write a good, clear thesis which answers a prompt. However, in years past, it was conceivable that a thesis could be implied on these essays since a stated thesis was not a part of the rubric. Now it is a part of the rubric. Because of this change, all students must now be certain to have a clearly stated thesis. This is a bit formulaic, but it is what teachers must teach in order to prepare their students well for the test.

So this would be my advice to teachers:

• Remember that you are always a writing teacher. The aspects of writing a literary analysis response are still just teaching how to write well. To be specific, teach students to rely upon the text , to make an analysis of the text, and to elaborate upon that analysis. Be certain to teach students the difference between summary and analysis . This is the heart of scoring well in Row B.
• I would teach students to put the thesis in the introduction and to underline It always helps for a writer to think about audience in all writing, and in this case the audience is someone who is reading many essays and needs to be certain to see the thesis to assign the point.
• Regarding a thesis: Teach students that creating a good thesis has two purposes. The first is so that the reader knows where the piece is headed. But the second is so that the writer knows where the piece is headed.
• Related to this: Planning is essential before writing. You need to know your thesis so that you can keep the piece focused. As an experienced reader, I sometimes would see a student write him/herself into a good essay. The piece would develop into a better essay than the thesis. With a full point being for a good thesis, a student must plan before writing and must write within the context of the thesis or no point would be assigned.

Next Steps for Tackling the New Rubric

As you begin to use the new AP ® English rubrics in your classroom this school year, we encourage you to use the rubric categories and language to guide the skills you teach and follow these next steps:

• First, download our fillable Teacher English Language Scoring Rubric to keep track of all of these pointers when you are evaluating student work on the new AP ® English rubric. Make copies to reuse with each essay you grade!

TEACHER Scoring Rubric

• Second, plan a lesson to introduce your students to the new rubric. Review the rubric with them and prep them to use it for self-assessment on their next essay.
• Third, assign your first practice essay of the school year with confidence! Plan to have your class practice writing thesis statements, and give students plenty of opportunities to practice and workshop more straightforward evidence and commentary strategies.

If your school partners with Marco Learning, take advantage of the opportunity to get personalized feedback for your students from one of our qualified Graders. Graders complete qualification modules to demonstrate proficiency with the new rubric in addition to calibration exercises specific to each prompt.

Log in to your Marco Learning account , and pick from any College Board released prompts dating back to 1999. Scoring and feedback on all AP ® English prompts will be completed using the new rubrics so students and teachers can be prepared for the exams in May!

If we don’t currently work with your school, learn more about how Marco Learning supports AP teachers here .

Please read Marco Learning’s Terms and Conditions, click to agree, and submit to continue to your content.

Please read Marco Learning’s Terms and Conditions, click to agree, and submit at the bottom of the window.

MARCO LEARNING TERMS OF USE

Last Modified: 1/24/2023

Acceptance of the Terms of Use

These terms of use are entered into by and between You and Marco Learning LLC (“ Company “, “ we “, or “ us “). The following terms and conditions (these “ Terms of Use “), govern your access to and use of Marco Learning , including any content, functionality, and services offered on or through Marco Learning (the “ Website “), whether as a guest or a registered user.

Please read the Terms of Use carefully before you start to use the Website. By using the Website or by clicking to accept or agree to the Terms of Use when this option is made available to you, you accept and agree to be bound and abide by these Terms of Use. You may not order or obtain products or services from this website if you (i) do not agree to these Terms of Use, or (ii) are prohibited from accessing or using this Website or any of this Website’s contents, goods or services by applicable law . If you do not want to agree to these Terms of Use, you must not access or use the Website.

This Website is offered and available to users who are 13 years of age or older, and reside in the United States or any of its territories or possessions. Any user under the age of 18 must (a) review the Terms of Use with a parent or legal guardian to ensure the parent or legal guardian acknowledges and agrees to these Terms of Use, and (b) not access the Website if his or her parent or legal guardian does not agree to these Terms of Use. By using this Website, you represent and warrant that you meet all of the foregoing eligibility requirements. If you do not meet all of these requirements, you must not access or use the Website.

Changes to the Terms of Use

We may revise and update these Terms of Use from time to time in our sole discretion. All changes are effective immediately when we post them, and apply to all access to and use of the Website thereafter.

These Terms of Use are an integral part of the Website Terms of Use that apply generally to the use of our Website. Your continued use of the Website following the posting of revised Terms of Use means that you accept and agree to the changes. You are expected to check this page each time you access this Website so you are aware of any changes, as they are binding on you.

Accessing the Website and Account Security

We reserve the right to withdraw or amend this Website, and any service or material we provide on the Website, in our sole discretion without notice. We will not be liable if for any reason all or any part of the Website is unavailable at any time or for any period. From time to time, we may restrict access to some parts of the Website, or the entire Website, to users, including registered users.

You are responsible for (i) making all arrangements necessary for you to have access to the Website, and (ii) ensuring that all persons who access the Website through your internet connection are aware of these Terms of Use and comply with them.

To access the Website or some of the resources it offers, you may be asked to provide certain registration details or other information. It is a condition of your use of the Website that all the information you provide on the Website is correct, current, and complete. You agree that all information you provide to register with this Website or otherwise, including but not limited to through the use of any interactive features on the Website, is governed by our Marco Learning Privacy Policy , and you consent to all actions we take with respect to your information consistent with our Privacy Policy.

If you choose, or are provided with, a user name, password, or any other piece of information as part of our security procedures, you must treat such information as confidential, and you must not disclose it to any other person or entity. You also acknowledge that your account is personal to you and agree not to provide any other person with access to this Website or portions of it using your user name, password, or other security information. You agree to notify us immediately of any unauthorized access to or use of your user name or password or any other breach of security. You also agree to ensure that you exit from your account at the end of each session. You should use particular caution when accessing your account from a public or shared computer so that others are not able to view or record your password or other personal information.

We have the right to disable any user name, password, or other identifier, whether chosen by you or provided by us, at any time in our sole discretion for any or no reason, including if, in our opinion, you have violated any provision of these Terms of Use.

Intellectual Property Rights

The Website and its entire contents, features, and functionality (including but not limited to all information, software, text, displays, images, graphics, video, other visuals, and audio, and the design, selection, and arrangement thereof) are owned by the Company, its licensors, or other providers of such material and are protected by United States and international copyright, trademark, patent, trade secret, and other intellectual property or proprietary rights laws. Your use of the Website does not grant to you ownership of any content, software, code, date or materials you may access on the Website.

These Terms of Use permit you to use the Website for your personal, non-commercial use only. You must not reproduce, distribute, modify, create derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, republish, download, store, or transmit any of the material on our Website, except as follows:

• Your computer may temporarily store copies of such materials in RAM incidental to your accessing and viewing those materials.
• You may store files that are automatically cached by your Web browser for display enhancement purposes.
• You may print or download one copy of a reasonable number of pages of the Website for your own personal, non-commercial use and not for further reproduction, publication, or distribution.
• If we provide desktop, mobile, or other applications for download, you may download a single copy to your computer or mobile device solely for your own personal, non-commercial use, provided you agree to be bound by our end user license agreement for such applications.
• If we provide social media features with certain content, you may take such actions as are enabled by such features.

You must not:

• Modify copies of any materials from this site.
• Use any illustrations, photographs, video or audio sequences, or any graphics separately from the accompanying text.
• Delete or alter any copyright, trademark, or other proprietary rights notices from copies of materials from this site.

You must not access or use for any commercial purposes any part of the Website or any services or materials available through the Website.

If you wish to make any use of material on the Website other than that set out in this section, please contact us

If you print, copy, modify, download, or otherwise use or provide any other person with access to any part of the Website in breach of the Terms of Use, your right to use the Website will stop immediately and you must, at our option, return or destroy any copies of the materials you have made. No right, title, or interest in or to the Website or any content on the Website is transferred to you, and all rights not expressly granted are reserved by the Company. Any use of the Website not expressly permitted by these Terms of Use is a breach of these Terms of Use and may violate copyright, trademark, and other laws.

Trademarks, logos, service marks, trade names, and all related names, logos, product and service names, designs, and slogans are trademarks of the Company or its affiliates or licensors (collectively, the “ Trademarks ”). You must not use such Trademarks without the prior written permission of the Company. All other names, logos, product and service names, designs, and slogans on this Website are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Prohibited Uses

You may use the Website only for lawful purposes and in accordance with these Terms of Use. You agree not to use the Website:

• In any way that violates any applicable federal, state, local, or international law or regulation (including, without limitation, any laws regarding the export of data or software to and from the US or other countries).
• For the purpose of exploiting, harming, or attempting to exploit or harm minors in any way by exposing them to inappropriate content, asking for personally identifiable information, or otherwise.
• To send, knowingly receive, upload, download, use, or re-use any material that does not comply with the Content Standards set out in these Terms of Use.
• To transmit, or procure the sending of, any advertising or promotional material, including any “junk mail”, “chain letter”, “spam”, or any other similar solicitation.
• To impersonate or attempt to impersonate the Company, a Company employee, another user, or any other person or entity (including, without limitation, by using email addresses or screen names associated with any of the foregoing).
• To engage in any other conduct that restricts or inhibits anyone’s use or enjoyment of the Website, or which, as determined by us, may harm the Company or users of the Website or expose them to liability.

Additionally, you agree not to:

• Use the Website in any manner that could disable, overburden, damage, or impair the site or interfere with any other party’s use of the Website, including their ability to engage in real time activities through the Website.
• Use any robot, spider, or other automatic device, process, or means to access the Website for any purpose, including monitoring or copying any of the material on the Website.
• Use any manual process to monitor or copy any of the material on the Website or for any other unauthorized purpose without our prior written consent.
• Use any device, software, or routine that interferes with the proper working of the Website.
• Introduce any viruses, Trojan horses, worms, logic bombs, or other material that is malicious or technologically harmful.
• Attempt to gain unauthorized access to, interfere with, damage, or disrupt any parts of the Website, the server on which the Website is stored, or any server, computer, or database connected to the Website.
• Attack the Website via a denial-of-service attack or a distributed denial-of-service attack.
• Otherwise attempt to interfere with the proper working of the Website.

If you use, or assist another person in using the Website in any unauthorized way, you agree that you will pay us an additional $50 per hour for any time we spend to investigate and correct such use, plus any third party costs of investigation we incur (with a minimum $300 charge). You agree that we may charge any credit card number provided for your account for such amounts. You further agree that you will not dispute such a charge and that we retain the right to collect any additional actual costs.

User Contributions

The Website may contain message boards, chat rooms, personal web pages or profiles, forums, bulletin boards, and other interactive features (collectively, “ Interactive Services “) that allow users to post, submit, publish, display, or transmit to other users or other persons (hereinafter, “ post “) content or materials (collectively, “ User Contributions “) on or through the Website.

All User Contributions must comply with the Content Standards set out in these Terms of Use.

Any User Contribution you post to the site will be considered non-confidential and non-proprietary. By providing any User Contribution on the Website, you grant us and our affiliates and service providers, and each of their and our respective licensees, successors, and assigns the right to use, reproduce, modify, perform, display, distribute, and otherwise disclose to third parties any such material for any purpose.

You represent and warrant that:

• You own or control all rights in and to the User Contributions and have the right to grant the license granted above to us and our affiliates and service providers, and each of their and our respective licensees, successors, and assigns.
• All of your User Contributions do and will comply with these Terms of Use.

You understand and acknowledge that you are responsible for any User Contributions you submit or contribute, and you, not the Company, have full responsibility for such content, including its legality, reliability, accuracy, and appropriateness.

For any academic source materials such as textbooks and workbooks which you submit to us in connection with our online tutoring services, you represent and warrant that you are entitled to upload such materials under the “fair use” doctrine of copyright law. In addition, if you request that our system display a representation of a page or problem from a textbook or workbook, you represent and warrant that you are in proper legal possession of such textbook or workbook and that your instruction to our system to display a page or problem from your textbook or workbook is made for the sole purpose of facilitating your tutoring session, as “fair use” under copyright law.

You agree that we may record all or any part of any live online classes and tutoring sessions (including voice chat communications) for quality control and other purposes. You agree that we own all transcripts and recordings of such sessions and that these Terms of Use will be deemed an irrevocable assignment of rights in all such transcripts and recordings to us.

We are not responsible or liable to any third party for the content or accuracy of any User Contributions posted by you or any other user of the Website.

Monitoring and Enforcement: Termination

We have the right to:

• Remove or refuse to post any User Contributions for any or no reason in our sole discretion.
• Take any action with respect to any User Contribution that we deem necessary or appropriate in our sole discretion, including if we believe that such User Contribution violates the Terms of Use, including the Content Standards, infringes any intellectual property right or other right of any person or entity, threatens the personal safety of users of the Website or the public, or could create liability for the Company.
• Disclose your identity or other information about you to any third party who claims that material posted by you violates their rights, including their intellectual property rights or their right to privacy.
• Take appropriate legal action, including without limitation, referral to law enforcement, for any illegal or unauthorized use of the Website.
• Terminate or suspend your access to all or part of the Website for any or no reason, including without limitation, any violation of these Terms of Use.

Without limiting the foregoing, we have the right to cooperate fully with any law enforcement authorities or court order requesting or directing us to disclose the identity or other information of anyone posting any materials on or through the Website. YOU WAIVE AND HOLD HARMLESS THE COMPANY AND ITS AFFILIATES, LICENSEES, AND SERVICE PROVIDERS FROM ANY CLAIMS RESULTING FROM ANY ACTION TAKEN BY ANY OF THE FOREGOING PARTIES DURING, OR TAKEN AS A CONSEQUENCE OF, INVESTIGATIONS BY EITHER SUCH PARTIES OR LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES.

However, we do not undertake to review material before it is posted on the Website, and cannot ensure prompt removal of objectionable material after it has been posted. Accordingly, we assume no liability for any action or inaction regarding transmissions, communications, or content provided by any user or third party. We have no liability or responsibility to anyone for performance or nonperformance of the activities described in this section.

Content Standards

These content standards apply to any and all User Contributions and use of Interactive Services. User Contributions must in their entirety comply with all applicable federal, state, local, and international laws and regulations. Without limiting the foregoing, User Contributions must not:

• Contain any material that is defamatory, obscene, indecent, abusive, offensive, harassing, violent, hateful, inflammatory, or otherwise objectionable.
• Promote sexually explicit or pornographic material, violence, or discrimination based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, or age.
• Infringe any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright, or other intellectual property or other rights of any other person.
• Violate the legal rights (including the rights of publicity and privacy) of others or contain any material that could give rise to any civil or criminal liability under applicable laws or regulations or that otherwise may be in conflict with these Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy .
• Be likely to deceive any person.
• Promote any illegal activity, or advocate, promote, or assist any unlawful act.
• Cause annoyance, inconvenience, or needless anxiety or be likely to upset, embarrass, alarm, or annoy any other person.
• Impersonate any person, or misrepresent your identity or affiliation with any person or organization.
• Involve commercial activities or sales, such as contests, sweepstakes, and other sales promotions, barter, or advertising.
• Give the impression that they emanate from or are endorsed by us or any other person or entity, if this is not the case.

(collectively, the “ Content Standards ”)

Copyright Infringement

If you believe that any User Contributions violate your copyright, please contact us  and provide the following information:

• An electronic or physical signature of the person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the copyright interest;
• A description of the copyrighted work that you claim has been infringed;
• A description of where the material you claim is infringing is located on the website (and such description must reasonably sufficient to enable us to find the alleged infringing material);
• Your address, telephone number and email address;
• A written statement by you that you have a good faith belief that the disputed use is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; and
• A statement by you, made under the penalty of perjury, that the above information in your notice is accurate and that you are the copyright owner or authorized to act on the copyright owner’s behalf.

We may terminate the accounts of any infringers.

Reliance on Information Posted

From time to time, we may make third party opinions, advice, statements, offers, or other third party information or content available on the Website or from tutors under tutoring services (collectively, “Third Party Content”). All Third Party Content is the responsibility of the respective authors thereof and should not necessarily be relied upon. Such third party authors are solely responsible for such content. WE DO NOT (I) GUARANTEE THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR USEFULNESS OF ANY THIRD PARTY CONTENT ON THE SITE OR ANY VERIFICATION SERVICES DONE ON OUR TUTORS OR INSTRUCTORS, OR (II) ADOPT, ENDORSE OR ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OR RELIABILITY OF ANY OPINION, ADVICE, OR STATEMENT MADE BY ANY TUTOR OR INSTRUCTOR OR ANY PARTY THAT APPEARS ON THE WEBSITE. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL WE BE RESPONSBILE OR LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE RESULTING FROM YOUR RELIANCE ON INFORMATION OR OTHER CONENT POSTED ON OR AVAILBLE FROM THE WEBSITE.

Changes to the Website

We may update the content on this Website from time to time, but its content is not necessarily complete or up-to-date. Any of the material on the Website may be out of date at any given time, and we are under no obligation to update such material.

Information About You and Your Visits to the Website

All information we collect on this Website is subject to our Privacy Policy . By using the Website, you consent to all actions taken by us with respect to your information in compliance with the Privacy Policy.

Online Purchases and Other Terms and Conditions

All purchases through our site or other transactions for the sale of services and information formed through the Website or resulting from visits made by you are governed by our Terms of Sale, which are hereby incorporated into these Terms of Use.

Additional terms and conditions may also apply to specific portions, services, or features of the Website. All such additional terms and conditions are hereby incorporated by this reference into these Terms of Use.

Linking to the Website and Social Media Features

You may link to our homepage, provided you do so in a way that is fair and legal and does not damage our reputation or take advantage of it, but you must not establish a link in such a way as to suggest any form of association, approval, or endorsement on our part without our express written consent.

This Website may provide certain social media features that enable you to:

• Link from your own or certain third-party websites to certain content on this Website.
• Send emails or other communications with certain content, or links to certain content, on this Website.
• Cause limited portions of content on this Website to be displayed or appear to be displayed on your own or certain third-party websites.

You may use these features solely as they are provided by us, and solely with respect to the content they are displayed with and otherwise in accordance with any additional terms and conditions we provide with respect to such features. Subject to the foregoing, you must not:

• Establish a link from any website that is not owned by you.
• Cause the Website or portions of it to be displayed on, or appear to be displayed by, any other site, for example, framing, deep linking, or in-line linking.
• Link to any part of the Website other than the homepage.
• Otherwise take any action with respect to the materials on this Website that is inconsistent with any other provision of these Terms of Use.

The website from which you are linking, or on which you make certain content accessible, must comply in all respects with the Content Standards set out in these Terms of Use.

You agree to cooperate with us in causing any unauthorized framing or linking immediately to stop. We reserve the right to withdraw linking permission without notice.

We may disable all or any social media features and any links at any time without notice in our discretion.

Links from the Website

If the Website contains links to other sites and resources provided by third parties (“ Linked Sites ”), these links are provided for your convenience only. This includes links contained in advertisements, including banner advertisements and sponsored links. You acknowledge and agree that we have no control over the contents, products, services, advertising or other materials which may be provided by or through those Linked sites or resources, and accept no responsibility for them or for any loss or damage that may arise from your use of them. If you decide to access any of the third-party websites linked to this Website, you do so entirely at your own risk and subject to the terms and conditions of use for such websites.

You agree that if you include a link from any other website to the Website, such link will open in a new browser window and will link to the full version of an HTML formatted page of this Website. You are not permitted to link directly to any image hosted on the Website or our products or services, such as using an “in-line” linking method to cause the image hosted by us to be displayed on another website. You agree not to download or use images hosted on this Website or another website, for any purpose, including, without limitation, posting such images on another website. You agree not to link from any other website to this Website in any manner such that the Website, or any page of the Website, is “framed,” surrounded or obfuscated by any third party content, materials or branding. We reserve all of our rights under the law to insist that any link to the Website be discontinued, and to revoke your right to link to the Website from any other website at any time upon written notice to you.

Geographic Restrictions

The owner of the Website is based in the state of New Jersey in the United States. We provide this Website for use only by persons located in the United States. We make no claims that the Website or any of its content is accessible or appropriate outside of the United States. Access to the Website may not be legal by certain persons or in certain countries. If you access the Website from outside the United States, you do so on your own initiative and are responsible for compliance with local laws.

Disclaimer of Warranties

You understand that we cannot and do not guarantee or warrant that files available for downloading from the internet or the Website will be free of viruses or other destructive code. You are responsible for implementing sufficient procedures and checkpoints to satisfy your particular requirements for anti-virus protection and accuracy of data input and output, and for maintaining a means external to our site for any reconstruction of any lost data. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PROVIDED BY LAW, WE WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE CAUSED BY A DISTRIBUTED DENIAL-OF-SERVICE ATTACK, VIRUSES, OR OTHER TECHNOLOGICALLY HARMFUL MATERIAL THAT MAY INFECT YOUR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT, COMPUTER PROGRAMS, DATA, OR OTHER PROPRIETARY MATERIAL DUE TO YOUR USE OF THE WEBSITE OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE OR TO YOUR DOWNLOADING OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON IT, OR ON ANY WEBSITE LINKED TO IT.

YOUR USE OF THE WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT, AND ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE IS AT YOUR OWN RISK. THE WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT, AND ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE” BASIS, WITHOUT ANY WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. NEITHER THE COMPANY NOR ANY PERSON ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPANY MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WITH RESPECT TO THE COMPLETENESS, SECURITY, RELIABILITY, QUALITY, ACCURACY, OR AVAILABILITY OF THE WEBSITE. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, NEITHER THE COMPANY NOR ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPANY REPRESENTS OR WARRANTS THAT THE WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT, OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE WILL BE ACCURATE, RELIABLE, ERROR-FREE, OR UNINTERRUPTED, THAT DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED, THAT OUR SITE OR THE SERVER THAT MAKES IT AVAILABLE ARE FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS, OR THAT THE WEBSITE OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE WILL OTHERWISE MEET YOUR NEEDS OR EXPECTATIONS.

TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PROVIDED BY LAW, THE COMPANY HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, STATUTORY, OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT, AND FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

THE FOREGOING DOES NOT AFFECT ANY WARRANTIES THAT CANNOT BE EXCLUDED OR LIMITED UNDER APPLICABLE LAW.

Limitation on Liability

TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PROVIDED BY LAW, IN NO EVENT WILL THE COMPANY, ITS AFFILIATES, OR THEIR LICENSORS, SERVICE PROVIDERS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OFFICERS, OR DIRECTORS BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, UNDER ANY LEGAL THEORY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR USE, OR INABILITY TO USE, THE WEBSITE, ANY WEBSITES LINKED TO IT, ANY CONTENT ON THE WEBSITE OR SUCH OTHER WEBSITES, INCLUDING ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PERSONAL INJURY, PAIN AND SUFFERING, EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, LOSS OF REVENUE, LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF BUSINESS OR ANTICIPATED SAVINGS, LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF GOODWILL, LOSS OF DATA, AND WHETHER CAUSED BY TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), BREACH OF CONTRACT, OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF FORESEEABLE.

THE FOREGOING DOES NOT AFFECT ANY LIABILITY THAT CANNOT BE EXCLUDED OR LIMITED UNDER APPLICABLE LAW.

Indemnification

You agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Company, its affiliates, licensors, and service providers, and its and their respective officers, directors, employees, contractors, agents, licensors, suppliers, successors, and assigns from and against any claims, liabilities, damages, judgments, awards, losses, costs, expenses, or fees (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) arising out of or relating to your violation of these Terms of Use or your use of the Website, including, but not limited to, your User Contributions, any use of the Website’s content, services, and products other than as expressly authorized in these Terms of Use or your use of any information obtained from the Website.

Governing Law and Jurisdiction

All matters relating to the Website and these Terms of Use and any dispute or claim arising therefrom or related thereto (in each case, including non-contractual disputes or claims), shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New Jersey without giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision or rule (whether of the State of New Jersey or any other jurisdiction).

Any legal suit, action, or proceeding arising out of, or related to, these Terms of Use or the Website shall be instituted exclusively in the federal courts of the United States or the courts of the State of New Jersey in each case located in the County of Monmouth although we retain the right to bring any suit, action, or proceeding against you for breach of these Terms of Use in your country of residence or any other relevant country. You waive any and all objections to the exercise of jurisdiction over you by such courts and to venue in such courts. You may not under any circumstances commence or maintain against us any class action, class arbitration, or other representative action or proceeding.

Arbitration

By using this Website, you agree, at Company’s sole discretion, that it may require you to submit any disputes arising from the use of these Terms of Use or the Website, including disputes arising from or concerning their interpretation, violation, invalidity, non-performance, or termination, to final and binding arbitration under the Rules of Arbitration of the American Arbitration Association applying New Jersey law. In doing so, YOU GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO GO TO COURT to assert or defend any claims between you and us. YOU ALSO GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN A CLASS ACTION OR OTHER CLASS PROCEEDING. Your rights may be determined by a NEUTRAL ARBITRATOR, NOT A JUDGE OR JURY. You are entitled to a fair hearing before the arbitrator. The arbitrator can grant any relief that a court can, but you should note that arbitration proceedings are usually simpler and more streamlined than trials and other judicial proceedings. Decisions by the arbitrator are enforceable in court and may be overturned by a court only for very limited reasons.

Any proceeding to enforce this arbitration provision, including any proceeding to confirm, modify, or vacate an arbitration award, may be commenced in any court of competent jurisdiction. In the event that this arbitration provision is for any reason held to be unenforceable, any litigation against Company must be commenced only in the federal or state courts located in Monmouth County, New Jersey. You hereby irrevocably consent to the jurisdiction of those courts for such purposes.

Limitation on Time to File Claims

ANY CAUSE OF ACTION OR CLAIM YOU MAY HAVE ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OF USE OR THE WEBSITE MUST BE COMMENCED WITHIN ONE (1) YEAR AFTER THE CAUSE OF ACTION ACCRUES, OTHERWISE, SUCH CAUSE OF ACTION OR CLAIM IS PERMANENTLY BARRED.

Waiver and Severability

No waiver by the Company of any term or condition set out in these Terms of Use shall be deemed a further or continuing waiver of such term or condition or a waiver of any other term or condition, and any failure of the Company to assert a right or provision under these Terms of Use shall not constitute a waiver of such right or provision.

If any provision of these Terms of Use is held by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable for any reason, such provision shall be eliminated or limited to the minimum extent such that the remaining provisions of the Terms of Use will continue in full force and effect.

Entire Agreement

The Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and Terms of Sale constitute the sole and entire agreement between you and Marco Learning LLC regarding the Website and supersede all prior and contemporaneous understandings, agreements, representations, and warranties, both written and oral, regarding the Website.

Communications and Miscellaneous

If you provide us your email address, you agree and consent to receive email messages from us. These emails may be transaction or relationship communications relating to the products or services we offer, such as administrative notices and service announcements or changes, or emails containing commercial offers, promotions or special offers from us.

Your Comments and Concerns

This website is operated by Marco Learning LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company with an address of 113 Monmouth Road, Suite 1, Wrightstown, New Jersey 08562.

Please contact us   for all other feedback, comments, requests for technical support, and other communications relating to the Website.

Creating and Scoring Essay Tests

FatCamera / Getty Images

• Tips & Strategies
• An Introduction to Teaching
• Policies & Discipline
• Community Involvement
• School Administration
• Technology in the Classroom
• Teaching Adult Learners
• Issues In Education
• Teaching Resources
• Becoming A Teacher
• Assessments & Tests
• Elementary Education
• Secondary Education
• Special Education
• Homeschooling
• M.Ed., Curriculum and Instruction, University of Florida
• B.A., History, University of Florida

Essay tests are useful for teachers when they want students to select, organize, analyze, synthesize, and/or evaluate information. In other words, they rely on the upper levels of Bloom's Taxonomy . There are two types of essay questions: restricted and extended response.

• Restricted Response - These essay questions limit what the student will discuss in the essay based on the wording of the question. For example, "State the main differences between John Adams' and Thomas Jefferson's beliefs about federalism," is a restricted response. What the student is to write about has been expressed to them within the question.
• Extended Response - These allow students to select what they wish to include in order to answer the question. For example, "In Of Mice and Men , was George's killing of Lennie justified? Explain your answer." The student is given the overall topic, but they are free to use their own judgment and integrate outside information to help support their opinion.

Student Skills Required for Essay Tests

Before expecting students to perform well on either type of essay question, we must make sure that they have the required skills to excel. Following are four skills that students should have learned and practiced before taking essay exams:

• The ability to select appropriate material from the information learned in order to best answer the question.
• The ability to organize that material in an effective manner.
• The ability to show how ideas relate and interact in a specific context.
• The ability to write effectively in both sentences and paragraphs.

Constructing an Effective Essay Question

Following are a few tips to help in the construction of effective essay questions:

• Begin with the lesson objectives in mind. Make sure to know what you wish the student to show by answering the essay question.
• Decide if your goal requires a restricted or extended response. In general, if you wish to see if the student can synthesize and organize the information that they learned, then restricted response is the way to go. However, if you wish them to judge or evaluate something using the information taught during class, then you will want to use the extended response.
• If you are including more than one essay, be cognizant of time constraints. You do not want to punish students because they ran out of time on the test.
• Write the question in a novel or interesting manner to help motivate the student.
• State the number of points that the essay is worth. You can also provide them with a time guideline to help them as they work through the exam.
• If your essay item is part of a larger objective test, make sure that it is the last item on the exam.

Scoring the Essay Item

One of the downfalls of essay tests is that they lack in reliability. Even when teachers grade essays with a well-constructed rubric, subjective decisions are made. Therefore, it is important to try and be as reliable as possible when scoring your essay items. Here are a few tips to help improve reliability in grading:

• Determine whether you will use a holistic or analytic scoring system before you write your rubric . With the holistic grading system, you evaluate the answer as a whole, rating papers against each other. With the analytic system, you list specific pieces of information and award points for their inclusion.
• Prepare the essay rubric in advance. Determine what you are looking for and how many points you will be assigning for each aspect of the question.
• Avoid looking at names. Some teachers have students put numbers on their essays to try and help with this.
• Score one item at a time. This helps ensure that you use the same thinking and standards for all students.
• Avoid interruptions when scoring a specific question. Again, consistency will be increased if you grade the same item on all the papers in one sitting.
• If an important decision like an award or scholarship is based on the score for the essay, obtain two or more independent readers.
• Beware of negative influences that can affect essay scoring. These include handwriting and writing style bias, the length of the response, and the inclusion of irrelevant material.
• Review papers that are on the borderline a second time before assigning a final grade.
• How to Study Using the Basketball Review Game
• Creating Effective Fill-in-the-Blank Questions
• Teacher Housekeeping Tasks
• 4 Tips for Effective Classroom Management
• Dealing With Trips to the Bathroom During Class
• Tips to Cut Writing Assignment Grading Time
• Collecting Homework in the Classroom
• Why Students Cheat and How to Stop Them
• Planning Classroom Instruction
• Using Cloze Tests to Determine Reading Comprehension
• 10 Strategies to Boost Reading Comprehension
• Taking Daily Attendance
• How Scaffolding Instruction Can Improve Comprehension
• Field Trips: Pros and Cons
• Assignment Biography: Student Criteria and Rubric for Writing
• 3 Poetry Activities for Middle School Students

• Exam Prep >
• Prepare for Business School >
• Business School & Careers >
• Explore Programs >
• Connect with Schools >
• How to Apply >
• Help Center >
• About the Exam
• Register for the Exam
• Plan for Exam Day
• Prep for the Exam
• About the Executive Assessment
• Register for the Executive Assessment
• Plan for Assessment Day
• Prepare for the Assessment
• NMAT by GMAC
• Shop GMAT™ Official Prep
• About GMAT™ Official Prep
• Prep Strategies
• Personalized Prep Plan
• GMAT Mini Quiz
• Executive Assessment Exam Prep
• NMAT by GMAC Exam Prep

Prepare For Business School

• Business Fundamentals
• Skills Insight

Business School & Careers

• Why Business School
• Student Experience
• Business Internships
• B-School Go
• Quiz: Are You Leadership Material?
• MBA Return on Investment (ROI) Calculator
• Estimate Your Salary
• Success Stories
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Women in Business

Explore Programs

• Top Business School Programs
• Quiz: Which Post Graduate Program is Right for You?
• Quiz: Find the Best Program for Your Personality
• Business School Rankings
• Business Master's Programs
• MBA Programs
• Study Destinations
• Find Programs Near Me
• Find MBA Programs
• Find Master's Programs
• Find Executive Programs
• Find Online Programs

Connect with Schools

• About GradSelect
• Create a GradSelect Profile
• Prep Yourself for B-School
• Quiz: Can You Network Like An MBA?
• Events Calendar
• School Events
• GMAC Tours Events
• In-Person Events
• Online Events

How to Apply

• Apply to Programs
• The Value of Assessments
• Admissions Essays
• Letters of Recommendation
• Admissions Interviews
• Scholarships and Financing
• Quiz: What's Your Ideal Learning Style?

Help Center

Quick links.

Your official Business Writing Assessment score is the next step in achieving your business school goals. On this page, learn how to access your results and send your score to schools.

Accessing Your Results

Each Business Writing Assessment is evaluated using a standardized rubric, scored on a scale of 0-6 in one-point increments. Your score will be available to you via your Candidate Portal within 3-5 days of completing your assessment. You will also receive an email notification when your score is available.

Sending Your Score

Whether you choose to send your score to participating schools during your exam session or later, score sending for the Business Writing Assessment is completely free!    After submitting your essay response, or if you run out of time, you will proceed to the Score Sending Selection screen where you will have the option to send your score to schools of your choice. Note that you will not be able to preview your score before making this selection . If you choose not to send your score to schools at this time, or if you want to add additional schools to your selection, you will have the ability to send your scores to schools after you receive your score by reaching out to GMAC Customer Care and selecting “Business Writing Assessment” in the inquiry dropdown.   NOTE: The schools you select during or after your exam will have access to your score – you cannot remove schools from your school selection.  As a reminder, there is no need to cancel your score! If you do not want to send your score to any schools, you will have the option to select “Do not send.” Your score will still be available in your Candidate Portal, and you can always reach out to our Customer Care team if you do decide you want to send your score to any program(s).  

• Open access
• Published: 03 September 2024

Reliability of ChatGPT in automated essay scoring for dental undergraduate examinations

• Bernadette Quah 1 , 2 ,
• Lei Zheng 1 , 2   na1 ,
• Timothy Jie Han Sng 1 , 2   na1 ,
• Chee Weng Yong 1 , 2   na1 &
• Intekhab Islam   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7754-0609 1 , 2  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  962 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

This study aimed to answer the research question: How reliable is ChatGPT in automated essay scoring (AES) for oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) examinations for dental undergraduate students compared to human assessors?

Sixty-nine undergraduate dental students participated in a closed-book examination comprising two essays at the National University of Singapore. Using pre-created assessment rubrics, three assessors independently performed manual essay scoring, while one separate assessor performed AES using ChatGPT (GPT-4). Data analyses were performed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's α to evaluate the reliability and inter-rater agreement of the test scores among all assessors. The mean scores of manual versus automated scoring were evaluated for similarity and correlations.

A strong correlation was observed for Question 1 ( r  = 0.752–0.848, p  < 0.001) and a moderate correlation was observed between AES and all manual scorers for Question 2 ( r  = 0.527–0.571, p  < 0.001). Intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.794–0.858 indicated excellent inter-rater agreement, and Cronbach’s α of 0.881–0.932 indicated high reliability. For Question 1, the mean AES scores were similar to those for manual scoring ( p  > 0.05), and there was a strong correlation between AES and manual scores ( r  = 0.829, p  < 0.001). For Question 2, AES scores were significantly lower than manual scores ( p  < 0.001), and there was a moderate correlation between AES and manual scores ( r  = 0.599, p  < 0.001).

This study shows the potential of ChatGPT for essay marking. However, an appropriate rubric design is essential for optimal reliability. With further validation, the ChatGPT has the potential to aid students in self-assessment or large-scale marking automated processes.

Peer Review reports

Large Language Models (LLMs), such as OpenAI’s GPT-4, LLaMA by META, and Google’s LaMDA (Language Models for Dialogue Applications), have demonstrated tremendous potential in generating outputs based on user-specified instructions or prompts. These models are trained using large amounts of data and are capable of natural language processing tasks. Owing to their ability to comprehend, interpret, and generate natural language text, LLMs allow human-like conversations with coherent contextual responses to prompts. The capability of LLMs to summarize and generate texts that resemble human language allows the creation of task-focused systems that can ease the demands of human labor and improve efficiency.

OpenAI uses a closed application programming interface (API) to process data. Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (OpenAI Inc., California, USA, https://chat.openai.com/ ) was introduced globally in 2020 as ChatGPT3, a generative language model with 175 billion parameters [ 1 ]. It is based on a generative AI model that can generate new content based on the data on which they have been trained. The latest version, ChatGPT-4, was introduced in 2023 and has demonstrated improved creativity, reasoning, and the ability to process even more complicated tasks [ 2 ].

Since its release in the public domain, ChatGPT has been actively explored by both healthcare professionals and educators in an effort to attain human-like performance in the form of clinical reasoning, image recognition, diagnosis, and learning from medical databases. ChatGPT has proven to be a powerful tool with immense potential to provide students with an interactive platform to deepen their understanding of any given topic [ 3 ]. In addition, it is also capable of aiding in both lesson planning and student assessments [ 4 , 5 ].

The potential of ChatGPT for assessments

Automated Essay Scoring (AES) is not a new concept, and interest in AES has been increasing since the advent of AI. Three main categories of AES programs have been described, utilizing regression, classification, or neural network models [ 6 ]. A known problem of current AES systems is their unreliability in evaluating the content relevance and coherence of essays [ 6 ]. Newer language models such as ChatGPT, however, are potential game changers; they are simpler to learn than current deep learning programs and can therefore improve the accessibility of AES to educators. Mizumoto and Eguchi recently pioneered the potential use of ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and 4) for AES in the field of linguistics and reported an accuracy level sufficient for use as a supportive tool even when fine-tuning of the model was not performed [ 7 ].

The use of these AI-powered tools may potentially ease the burden on educators in marking large numbers of essay scripts, while providing personalized feedback to students [ 8 , 9 ]. This is especially crucial with larger class sizes and increasing student-to-teacher ratios, where it can be more difficult for educators to actively engage individual students. Additionally, manual scoring by humans can be subjective and susceptible to fatigue, which may put the scoring at risk of being unreliable [ 7 , 10 ]. The use of AI for essay scoring may thus help reduce intra- and inter-rater variability associated with manual scoring by providing a more standardized and reliable scoring process that eases the time- and labor-intensive scoring workload of human assessors [ 10 , 11 ].

The current role of AI in healthcare education

Generative AI has permeated the healthcare industry and provided a diverse range of health enhancements. An example is how AI facilitates radiographic evaluation and clinical diagnosis to improve the quality of patient care [ 12 , 13 ]. In medical and dental education, virtual or augmented reality and haptic simulations are some of the exciting technological tools already implemented to improve student competence and confidence in patient assessment and execution of procedures [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. The incorporation of ChatGPT into the dental curriculum would thus be the next step in enhancing student learning. The performance of ChatGPT in the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) was recently validated, with ChatGPT achieving a score equivalent to that of a third-year medical student [ 17 ]. However, no data are available on the performance of ChatGPT in the field of dentistry or oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS). Furthermore, the reliability of AI-powered language models for the grading of essays in the medical field has not yet been evaluated; in addition to essay structure and language, the evaluation of essay scripts in the field of OMS would require a level of understanding of dentistry, medicine and surgery.

Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the reliability of ChatGPT for AES in OMS examinations for final-year dental undergraduate students compared to human assessors. Our null hypothesis was that there would be no difference in the scores between the ChatGPT and human assessors. The research question for the study was as follows: How reliable is ChatGPT when used for AES in OMS examinations compared to human assessors?

Materials and methods

This study was conducted in the Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, under the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. The study received ethical approval from the university’s Institutional Review Board (REF: IRB-2023–1051) and was conducted and drafted with guidance from the education interventions critical appraisal worksheet introduced by BestBETs [ 18 ].

Sample size calculation for this study was based on the formula provided by Viechtbauer et al.: n  = ln (1-γ) / ln(1-π), where n, γ and π represent the sample size, significance level and level of confidence respectively [ 19 ]. Based on a 5% margin of error, a 95% confidence level and a 50% outcome response, it was calculated that a minimum sample size of 59 subjects was required. Ultimately, the study recruited 69 participants, all of whom were final-year undergraduate dental students. A closed-book OMS examination was conducted on the Examplify platform (ExamSoft Worldwide Inc., Texas, USA) as a part of the end-of-module assessment. The examination comprised two open-ended essay questions based on the topics taught in the module (Table  1 ).

Creation of standardized assessment

An assessment rubric was created for each question through discussion and collaboration of a workgroup comprising four assessors involved in the study. All members of the work group were academic staff from the faculty (I.I., B.Q., L.Z., T.J.H.S.) (Supplementary Tables S1 and S2) [ 20 ]. An analytic rubric was generated using the strategy outlined by Popham [ 21 ]. The process involved a discussion within the workgroup to agree on the learning outcomes of the essay questions. Two authors (I. I. and B. Q) independently generated the rubric criteria and descriptions for Question 1 (Infection). Similarly, for Question 2 (Trauma), the rubric criteria and descriptions were generated independently by two authors (I.I. and T.J.H.S.). The rubrics were revised until a consensus was reached between each pair. In the event of any disagreement, a third author (L.Z.) provided their opinion to aid in decision making.

Marking categories of Poor (0 marks), Satisfactory (2 marks), Good (3 marks), and Outstanding (4 marks) were allocated to each criterion, with a maximum of 4 marks attainable from each criterion. A criterion for overall essay structure and language was also included, with a maximum attainable 5 marks from this criterion. The highest score for each question was 40.

Model answers to the essays were prepared by another author (C.W.Y.), who did not participate in the creation of the rubrics. Using the rubrics as a reference, the author modified the model answer to create 5 variants of the answers such that each variant fell within different score ranges of 0–10, 11–20, 21–30, 31–40, 41–50. Subsequently, three authors (B. Q., L. Z., and T.J.H.S) graded the essays using the prepared rubrics. Revisions to the rubrics were made with consensus by all three authors, a process that also helped calibrate these three authors for manual essay scoring.

AES with ChatGPT

Essay scoring was performed using ChatGPT (GPT-4, released March 14, 2023) by one assessor who did not participate in the manual essay scoring exercise (I.I.). Prompts were generated based on a guideline by Giray, and the components of Instruction, Context, Input Data and Output Indication as discussed in the guideline were included in each prompt (Supplementary Tables 3 and 4) [ 22 ]. A prompt template was generated for each question by one assessor (I.I.) with advice from two experts in prompt engineering, based on the marking rubric. The criterion and point allocation were clearly written in prose and point forms. For the fine-tuning process, the prompts were input into ChatGPT using variants of the model answers provided by C.W.Y. Minor adjustments were made to the wording of certain parts of the prompts as necessary to correct any potential misinterpretations of the prompts by the ChatGPT. Each time, the prompt was entered into a new chat in the ChatGPT in a browser where the browser history and cookies were cleared. Subsequently, finalized prompts (Supplementary Tables 3 and 4) were used to score the student essays. AES scores were not used to calculate students’ actual essay scores.

Manual essay scoring

Manual essay scoring was completed independently by three assessors (B.Q., L.Z., and T.J.H.S.) using the assessment rubrics (Supplementary Tables S1 and S2). Calibration was performed during the rubric creation stage. The essays were anonymized to prevent bias during the marking process. The assessors recorded the marks allocated to each criterion, as well as the overall score of each essay, on a pre-prepared Excel spreadsheet. Scoring was performed separately and independently by all assessors before the final collation by a research team member (I.I.) for statistical analyses. The student was considered ‘able to briefly mention’ a criterion if they did not mention any of the keywords of the points within the criterion. The student was considered ‘able to elaborate on’ a point within the criterion if they were able to mention the keywords of that point as stated in the rubric, and were thus awarded higher marks in accordance with the rubric (e.g. the student was given a higher mark if they were able to mention the need to check for dyspnea and dysphagia, instead of simply mentioning a need to check the patient’s airway). Grading was performed with only whole marks as specified in the rubrics, and assessors were not allowed to give half marks or subscores.

Data synthesis

The scores given out of 40 per essay by each assessor were compiled. Data analyses were subsequently performed using SPSS® version 29.0.1.0(171) (IBM Corporation, New York, United States). For each essay question, correlations between the essay scores given by each assessor were analyzed and displayed using the inter-item correlation matrix. A correlation coefficient value ( r ) of 0.90–1.00 was indicative of a very strong, 0.70–0.89 indicative of strong, 0.40–0.69 moderate, 0.10–0.39 weak and < 0.10 negligible positive correlation between the scorers [ 23 ]. The cutoff p -value for the significance level was set at p  < 0.05. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's α were then calculated between all assessors to assess the inter-rater agreement and reliability, respectively [ 24 ]. The ICC was interpreted on a scale of 0 to 1.00, with a higher value indicating a higher level of agreement in scores given by the scorers to each student. A value less than 0.40 was indicative of poor, 0.40–0.59 fair, 0.60–0.74 good, and 0.75–1.00 excellent agreement [ 25 ]. Using Cronbach’s α, reliability was expressed on a range from 0 to 1.00, with a higher number indicating a higher level of consistency between the scorers in their scores given across the students. The reliability was considered ‘Less Reliable’ if the score was less 0.20, ‘Rather Reliable’ if the score was 0.20–0.40, ‘Quite Reliable’ if 0.40–0.60, ‘Reliable’ if 0.60–0.80 and ‘Very Reliable’ if 0.80–1.00 [ 26 ].

Similarly, the mean scores of the three manual scorers were calculated for each question. The mean manual scores were then analyzed for correlations with AES scores by using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Student’s t-test was also used to analyze any significant differences in mean scores between manual scoring and AES. A p -value of < 0.05 was required to conclude the presence of a statistically different score between the groups.

All final-year dental undergraduate students (69/69, 100%) had their essays graded by all manual scorers and AES as part of the study. Table 2 shows the mean scores for each individual assessor as well as the mean scores for the three manual scorers (Scorers 1, 2, and 3).

Analysis of correlation and agreement between all scorers

The inter-item correlation matrices and their respective p -values are listed in Table  3 . For Question 1, there was a strong positive correlation between the scores provided by each assessor (Scorers 1, 2, 3, and AES), with r -values ranging from 0.752–0.848. All p -values were < 0.001, indicating a significant positive correlation between all assessors. For Question 2, there was a strong positive correlation between Scorers 1 and 2 ( r  = 0.829) and Scorers 1 and 3 ( r  = 0.756). There was a moderate positive correlation between Scorers 2 and 3 ( r  = 0.655), as well as between AES and all manual scores ( r -values ranging from 0.527 to 0.571). Similarly, all p -values were < 0.001, indicative of a significant positive correlation between all scorers.

For the analysis of inter-rater agreement, ICC values of 0.858 (95% CI 0.628 – 0.933) and 0.794 (95% CI 0.563 – 0.892) were obtained for Questions 1 and 2, respectively, both of which were indicative of excellent inter-rater agreement. Cronbach’s α was 0.932 for Question 1 and 0.881 for Question 2, both of which were ‘Very Reliable’.

Analysis of correlation between manual scoring versus AES

The results of the Student’s t-test comparing the test score values from manual scoring and AES are shown in Table  2 . For Question 1, the mean manual scores (14.85 ± 4.988) were slightly higher than those of the AES (14.54 ± 5.490). However, these differences were not statistically significant ( p  > 0.05). For Question 2, the mean manual scores (23.11 ± 4.241) were also higher than those of the AES (18.62 ± 4.044); this difference was statistically significant ( p  < 0.001).

The results of the Pearson’s correlation coefficient calculations are shown in Table  4 . For Question 1, there was a strong and significant positive correlation between manual scoring and AES ( r  = 0.829, p  < 0.001). For Question 2, there was a moderate and statistically significant positive correlation between the two groups ( r  = 0.599, p  < 0.001).

Qualitative feedback from AES

Figures 1 , 2 and 3 show three examples of essay feedback and scoring provided by ChatGPT. ChatGPT provided feedback in a concise and systematic manner. Scores were clearly provided for each of the criteria listed in the assessment rubric. This was followed by in-depth feedback on the points within the criterion that the student had discussed and failed to mention. ChatGPT was able to differentiate between a student who briefly mentioned a key point and a student who provided better elaboration on the same point by allocating them two or three marks, respectively.

Example #1 of a marked essay with feedback from ChatGPT for Question 1

Example #2 of a marked essay with feedback from ChatGPT for Question 1

Example #3 of a marked essay with feedback from ChatGPT for Question 1

One limitation of ChatGPT that was identified during the scoring process was its inability to identify content that was not relevant to the essay or that was factually incorrect. This was despite the assessment rubric specifying that incorrect statements should be given 0 marks for that criterion. For example, a student who included points about incision and drainage also incorrectly stated that bone scraping to induce bleeding and packing of local hemostatic agents should be performed. Although these statements were factually incorrect, ChatGPT was unable to identify this and still awarded student marks for the point. Manual assessors were able to spot this and subsequently penalized the student for the mistake.

Since its recent rise in popularity, many people have been eager to tap into the potential of large language models, such as ChatGPT. In their review, Khan et al. discussed the growing role of ChatGPT in medical education, with promising uses for the creation of case studies and content such as quizzes and flashcards for self-directed practice [ 9 ]. As an LLM, the ability of ChatGPT to thoroughly evaluate sentence structure and clarity may allow it to confront the task of automated essay marking.

Advantages of ChatGPT in AES

This study found significant correlations and excellent inter-rater agreement between ChatGPT and manual scorers, and the mean scores between both groups showed strong to moderate correlations for both essay questions. This suggests that AES has the potential to provide a level of essay marking similar to that of the educators in our faculty. Similar positive findings were reflected in previous studies that compared manual and automated essay scoring ( r  = 0.532–0.766) [ 6 ]. However, there is still a need to further fine-tune the scoring system such that the score provided by AES deviates as little as possible from human scoring. For instance, the mean AES score was lower than that of manual scoring by 5 marks for Question 2. Although the difference may not seem large, it may potentially increase or decrease the final performance grade of students.

Apart from a decent level of reliability in manual essay scoring, there are many other benefits to using ChatGPT for AES. Compared to humans, the response time to prompts is much faster and can thus increase productivity and reduce the burden of a large workload on educational assessors [ 27 ]. In addition, ChatGPT can provide individualized feedback for each essay (Figs. 1 , 2 and 3 ). This helps provide students with comments specific to their essays, a feat that is difficult to achieve for a single educator teaching a large class size.

Similar to previous systems designed for AES, machine scoring is beneficial for removing human inconsistencies that can result from fatigue, mood swings, or bias [ 10 ]. ChatGPT is no exception. Furthermore, ChatGPT is more widely accessible than the conventional AES systems. Its software runs online instead of requiring downloads on a computer, and its user interface is simple to use. With GPT-3.5 being free to use and GPT-4 being 20 USD per month, it is also relatively inexpensive.

Marking the essay is only part of the equation, and the next step is to allow the students to know what went wrong and why. Nicol and Macfarlane described seven principles for good feedback. ChatGPT can fulfil most of these principles, namely, facilitating self-assessment, encouraging teacher and peer dialogue, clarifying what good performance is, providing opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance, and delivering high-quality information to students [ 28 ]. In this study, the feedback given by ChatGPT was categorized based on the rubric, and elaboration was provided for each criterion on the points the student mentioned and did not mention. By highlighting the ideal answer and where the student can improve, ChatGPT can clarify performance goals and provide opportunities to close the gap between the student’s current and desired performance. This creates opportunities for selfdirected learning and the utilization of blended learning environments. Students can use ChatGPT to review their preparation on topics, self-grade their essays, and receive instant feedback. Furthermore, the simple and interactive nature of the software encourages dialogue, as it can readily respond to any clarification the student wants to make. The importance of effective feedback has been demonstrated to be an essential component in medical education, in terms of enhancing the knowledge of the student without developing negative emotions [ 29 , 30 ].

These potential advantages of engaging ChatGPT for student assessments play well into the humanistic learning theory of medical education [ 31 , 32 ]. Self-directed learning allows students the freedom to learn at their own pace, with educators simply providing a conducive environment and the goals that the student should achieve. ChatGPT has the potential to supplement the role of the educator in self-directed learning, as it can be readily available to provide constructive and tailored feedback for assignments whenever the student is ready for it. This removes the burden that assignment deadlines place on students, which can allow them a greater sense of independence and control over their learning, and lead to greater self-motivation and self-fulfillment.

Potential pitfalls of ChatGPT

Potential pitfalls associated with the use of ChatGPT were identified. First, the ability to achieve reliable scores relies heavily on a well-created marking rubric with clearly defined terms. In this study, the correlations between scorers were stronger for Question 1 compared to Question 2, and the mean scores between the AES and manual scorers were also significantly different for Question 2, but not for Question 1. The lower reliability of the AES for Question 2 may be attributed to its broader nature, use of more complex medical terms, and lengthier scoring rubrics. The broad nature of the question left more room for individual interpretation and variation between humans and AES. The ability of ChatGPT to provide accurate answers may be reduced with lengthier prompts and conversations [ 27 ]. Furthermore, with less specific instructions or complex medical jargon, both automated systems and human scorers may interpret rubrics differently, resulting in varied scores across the board [ 10 , 33 , 34 ]. The authors thus recommend that to circumvent this, the use of ChatGPT for essay scoring should be restricted to questions that are less broad (e.g. shorter essays), or by breaking the task into multiple prompts for each individual criterion to reduce variations in interpretation [ 27 , 35 ]. Furthermore, the rubrics should contain concise and explicit instructions with appropriate grammar and vocabulary to avoid misinterpretation by both ChatGPT and human scorers, and provide a brief explanation to specify what certain medical terms mean (e.g. writing ‘pulse oximetry (SpO2) monitoring’ instead of only ‘SpO2’) for better contextualization [ 35 , 36 ].

Second, prompt engineering is a critical step in producing the desired outcome from ChatGPT [ 27 ]. A prompt that is too ambiguous or lacks context can lead to a response that is incomplete, generic, or irrelevant, and a prompt that exhibits bias runs the risk of bias reinforcement in the given reply [ 22 , 34 ]. Phrasing the prompt must also be carefully checked for spelling, grammatical mistakes, or inconsistencies, since ChatGPT uses the prompt’s phrasing literally. For example, a prompt that reads ‘give 3 marks if the student covers one or more coverage points’ will result in ChatGPT only giving the marks if multiple points are covered, because of the plural nature of the word ‘points’.

Third, irrelevant content may not be penalized during the essay-marking process. Students may ‘trick’ the AES by producing a lengthier essay to hit more relevant points and increase their score. This may result in essays of lower quality with multiple incorrect or nonsensical statements still rewarded with higher scores [ 10 ]. Our assessment rubric attempts to penalize the student with 0 marks if incorrect statements on the criterion are made; however, none of the students were penalized. This issue may be resolved as ChatGPT rapidly and continuously gains more medical and dental knowledge. Although data to support the competence of AI in medical education are sparse, the quality of the medical knowledge that ChatGPT already has is sufficient to achieve a passing mark at the USMLE [ 5 , 37 ]. In dentistry, when used to disseminate information on endodontics to patients, ChatGPT was found to provide detailed answers with an overall validity of 95% [ 38 ]. Over time, LLMs such as ChatGPT may be able to identify when students are not factually correct.

Other comments

The lack of human emotion in machine scoring can be both an advantage and a disadvantage. AES can provide feedback that is entirely factual and less biased than humans, and grades are objective and final [ 39 ]. However, human empathy is an essential quality that ChatGPT does not possess. One principle of good feedback is to encourage and motivate students to provide positive learning experiences and build self-esteem [ 28 ]. While ChatGPT can provide constructive feedback, it will not be able to replace the compassion, empathy, or emotional intelligence possessed by a quality educator possesses [ 40 ]. In our study, ChatGPT awarded lower mean scores of 14.54/40 (36.4%) and 18.62/40 (46.5%) compared to manual scoring for both questions. Although objective, some may view automated scoring as harsh because it provided failing grades to an average student.

This study demonstrates the ability of GPT-4 to evaluate essays without any specialized training or prompting. One long prompt was used to score each essay. Although more technical prompting methods, such as chain of thought, could be deployed, our single prompt method makes the method scalable and easier to adopt. As discussed earlier, ChatGPT is the most reliable when prompts are short and specific [ 34 ]. Hence, each prompt should ideally task ChatGPT to score only one or two criteria, rather than the entire rubric of the 10 criteria. However, in a class of 70, the assessors are required to run 700 prompts per question, which is impractical and unnecessary. With only one prompt, a good correlation was still found between the AES and manual scoring. It is likely that further exploration and experimentation with prompting techniques can improve the output.

While LLMs have the potential to revolutionize education in healthcare, some precautions must be taken. Artificial Hallucination is a widely described phenomenon; ChatGPT may generate seemingly genuine but inaccurate information [ 41 , 42 , 43 ]. Hallucinations have been attributed to biases and limitations of training data as well as algorithmic limitations [ 2 ]. Similarly, randomness of the generated responses has been observed; while it is useful for generating creative content, this may be an issue when ChatGPT is employed for topics requiring scientific or factual content [ 44 ]. Thus, LLMs are not infallible and still require human subject matter experts to validate the generated content. Finally, it is essential that educators play an active role in driving the development of dedicated training models to ensure consistency, continuity, and accountability, as overreliance on a corporate-controlled model may place educators at the mercy of algorithm changes.

The ethical implications of using ChatGPT in medical and dental education also need to be explored. As much as LLMs can provide convenience to both students and educators, privacy and data security remain a concern [ 45 ]. Robust university privacy policies and informed consent procedures should be in place for the protection of student data prior to the use of ChatGPT as part of student assessment. Furthermore, if LLMs like ChatGPT were to be used for grading examinations in the future, issues revolving around fairness and transparency of the grading process need to be resolved [ 46 ]. GPT-4 may have provided harsh scores in this study, possibly due to some shortfall in understanding certain phrases the students have written; models used in assessments will thus require sufficient training in the field of healthcare to properly acquire the relevant medical knowledge and hence understand and grade essays fairly.

As AI continues to develop, ChatGPT may eventually replace human assessors in essay scoring for dental undergraduate examinations. However, given its current limitations and dependence on a well-formed assessment rubric, relying solely on ChatGPT for exam grading may be inappropriate when the scores can affect the student’s overall module scores, career success, and mental health [ 47 ]. While this study primarily demonstrates the use of ChatGPT to grade essays, it also points to great potential in using it as an interactive learning tool. A good start for its use is essay assignments on pre-set topics, where students can direct their learning on their own and receive objective feedback on essay structure and content that does not count towards their final scores. Students can use rubrics to practice and gain effective feedback from LLMs in an engaging and stress-free environment. This reduces the burden on educators by easing the time-consuming task of grading essay assignments and allows students the flexibility to complete and grade their assignments whenever they are ready. Furthermore, assignments repeated with new class cohorts can enable more robust feedback from ChatGPT through machine learning.

Study limitations

The limitations of this study lie in part of its methodology. The study recruited 69 dental undergraduate students; while this is above the minimum calculated sample size of 59, a larger sample size would help to increase the generalizability of the study findings to larger populations of students and a wide scope of topics. The unique field of OMS also requires knowledge of both medical and dental subjects, and hence the results obtained from the use of ChatGPT for essay marking in other medical or dental specialties may differ slightly.

The use of rubrics for manual scoring could also be a potential source of bias. While the rubrics provide a framework for objective assessment, they cannot eliminate the subjectiveness of manual scoring. Variations in the interpretation of the students’ answers, leniency errors (whereby one scorer marks more leniently than another) or rater drift (fatigue from assessing many essays may affect leniency of marking and judgment) may still occur. To minimize bias resulting from these errors, multiple assessors were recruited for the manual scoring process and the average scores were used for comparison with AES.

This study investigated the reliability of ChatGPT in essay scoring for OMS examinations, and found positive correlations between ChatGPT and manual essay scoring. However, ChatGPT tended towards stricter scoring and was not capable of penalizing irrelevant or incorrect content. In its present state, GPT-4 should not be used as a standalone tool for teaching or assessment in the field of medical and dental education but can serve as an adjunct to aid students in self-assessment. The importance of proper rubric design to achieve optimal reliability when employing ChatGPT in student assessment cannot be overemphasized.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Floridi L, Chiriatti M. GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Mind Mach. 2020;30(4):681–94.

Article   Google Scholar  

Abd-Alrazaq A, AlSaad R, Alhuwail D, Ahmed A, Healy PM, Latifi S, Aziz S, Damseh R, Alabed Alrazak S, Sheikh J. Large language models in medical education: opportunities, challenges, and future directions. JMIR Med Educ. 2023;9:e48291.

Kasneci E, Sessler K, Küchemann S, Bannert M, Dementieva D, Fischer F, Gasser U, Groh G, Günnemann S, Hüllermeier E, et al. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learn Individ Differ. 2023;103:102274.

Javaid M, Haleem A, Singh RP, Khan S, Khan IH. Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system. BenchCouncil Transact Benchmarks Standards Eval. 2023;3(2): 100115.

Kung TH, Cheatham M, Medenilla A, Sillos C, De Leon L, Elepaño C, Madriaga M, Aggabao R, Diaz-Candido G, Maningo J, et al. Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLOS Digit Health. 2023;2(2):e0000198.

Ramesh D, Sanampudi SK. An automated essay scoring systems: a systematic literature review. Artif Intell Rev. 2022;55(3):2495–527.

Mizumoto A, Eguchi M. Exploring the potential of using an AI language model for automated essay scoring. Res Methods Appl Linguist. 2023;2(2): 100050.

Erturk S, Tilburg W, Igou E: Off the mark: Repetitive marking undermines essay evaluations due to boredom. Motiv Emotion 2022;46.

Khan RA, Jawaid M, Khan AR, Sajjad M. ChatGPT - Reshaping medical education and clinical management. Pak J Med Sci. 2023;39(2):605–7.

Hussein MA, Hassan H, Nassef M. Automated language essay scoring systems: a literature review. PeerJ Comput Sci. 2019;5:e208.

Blood I: Automated essay scoring: a literature review. Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL 2011, 11(2).

Menezes LDS, Silva TP, Lima Dos Santos MA, Hughes MM, Mariano Souza SDR, Leite Ribeiro PM, Freitas PHL, Takeshita WM: Assessment of landmark detection in cephalometric radiographs with different conditions of brightness and contrast using the an artificial intelligence software. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2023:20230065.

Bennani S, Regnard NE, Ventre J, Lassalle L, Nguyen T, Ducarouge A, Dargent L, Guillo E, Gouhier E, Zaimi SH, et al. Using AI to improve radiologist performance in detection of abnormalities on chest radiographs. Radiology. 2023;309(3): e230860.

Moussa R, Alghazaly A, Althagafi N, Eshky R, Borzangy S. Effectiveness of virtual reality and interactive simulators on dental education outcomes: systematic review. Eur J Dent. 2022;16(1):14–31.

Fanizzi C, Carone G, Rocca A, Ayadi R, Petrenko V, Casali C, Rani M, Giachino M, Falsitta LV, Gambatesa E, et al. Simulation to become a better neurosurgeon An international prospective controlled trial: The Passion study. Brain Spine. 2024;4:102829.

Lovett M, Ahanonu E, Molzahn A, Biffar D, Hamilton A. Optimizing individual wound closure practice using augmented reality: a randomized controlled study. Cureus. 2024;16(4):e59296.

Google Scholar  

Gilson A, Safranek CW, Huang T, Socrates V, Chi L, Taylor RA, Chartash D. How does ChatGPT perform on the United States medical licensing examination? the implications of large language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. JMIR Med Educ. 2023;9:e45312.

Educational Intervention Worksheet, BestBets, Accessed 31/03/2024.  https://bestbets.org/ca/pdf/educational_intervention.pdf .

Viechtbauer W, Smits L, Kotz D, Budé L, Spigt M, Serroyen J, Crutzen R. A simple formula for the calculation of sample size in pilot studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(11):1375–9.

Cox G, Morrison J, Brathwaite B: The Rubric: An Assessment Tool to Guide Students and Markers; 2015.

Popham J. W: “What’s Wrong—And What’s Right—With Rubrics.” Educ Leadersh. 1997;55(2):72–5.

Giray L. Prompt Engineering with ChatGPT: A Guide for Academic Writers. Ann Biomed Eng. 2023;51:3.

Schober P, Boer C, Schwarte LA. Correlation Coefficients: Appropriate Use and Interpretation. Anesth Analg. 2018;126(5):1763–8.

Liao SC, Hunt EA, Chen W. Comparison between inter-rater reliability and inter-rater agreement in performance assessment. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2010;39(8):613–8.

Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(4):284–90.

Hair J, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R: Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective; 2010.

Nazir A, Wang Z: A Comprehensive Survey of ChatGPT: Advancements, Applications, Prospects, and Challenges. Meta Radiol 2023;1(2).

Nicol D, Macfarlane D: Rethinking Formative Assessment in HE: a theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practice. IEEE Personal Communications - IEEE Pers Commun 2004;31.

Spooner M, Larkin J, Liew SC, Jaafar MH, McConkey S, Pawlikowska T. “Tell me what is ‘better’!” How medical students experience feedback, through the lens of self-regulatory learning. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):895.

Kornegay JG, Kraut A, Manthey D, Omron R, Caretta-Weyer H, Kuhn G, Martin S, Yarris LM. Feedback in medical education: a critical appraisal. AEM Educ Train. 2017;1(2):98–109.

Mukhalalati BA, Taylor A. Adult learning theories in context: a quick guide for healthcare professional educators. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2019;6:2382120519840332.

Taylor DC, Hamdy H. Adult learning theories: implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 83. Med Teach. 2013;35(11):e1561-1572.

Chakraborty S, Dann C, Mandal A, Dann B, Paul M, Hafeez-Baig A: Effects of Rubric Quality on Marker Variation in Higher Education. Studies In Educational Evaluation 2021;70.

Heston T, Khun C. Prompt engineering in medical education. Int Med Educ. 2023;2:198–205.

Sun GH: Prompt Engineering for Nurse Educators. Nurse Educ 2024.

Meskó B. Prompt engineering as an important emerging skill for medical professionals: tutorial. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e50638.

Sun L, Yin C, Xu Q, Zhao W. Artificial intelligence for healthcare and medical education: a systematic review. Am J Transl Res. 2023;15(7):4820–8.

Mohammad-Rahimi H, Ourang SA, Pourhoseingholi MA, Dianat O, Dummer PMH, Nosrat A: Validity and reliability of artificial intelligence chatbots as public sources of information on endodontics. Int Endodontic J 2023, n/a(n/a).

Peng X, Ke D, Xu B: Automated essay scoring based on finite state transducer: towards ASR transcription of oral English speech. In: Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Long Papers - Volume 1. Jeju Island, Korea: Association for Computational Linguistics; 2012:50–59.

Grassini S. Shaping the future of education: Exploring the Potential and Consequences of AI and ChatGPT in Educational Settings. Educ Sci. 2023;13(7):692.

Limitations.  https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt .

Sallam M, Salim NA, Barakat M, Al-Tammemi AB. ChatGPT applications in medical, dental, pharmacy, and public health education: A descriptive study highlighting the advantages and limitations. Narra J. 2023;3(1):e103.

Deng J, Lin Y. The Benefits and Challenges of ChatGPT: An Overview. Front Comput Intell Syst. 2023;2:81–3.

Choi W. Assessment of the capacity of ChatGPT as a self-learning tool in medical pharmacology: a study using MCQs. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):864.

Medina-Romero MÁ, Jinchuña Huallpa J, Flores-Arocutipa J, Panduro W, Chauca Huete L, Flores Limo F, Herrera E, Callacna R, Ariza Flores V, Quispe I, et al. Exploring the ethical considerations of using Chat GPT in university education. Period Eng Nat Sci (PEN). 2023;11:105–15.

Lee H. The rise of ChatGPT: Exploring its potential in medical education. Anat Sci Educ. 2024;17(5):926–31.

Steare T, Gutiérrez Muñoz C, Sullivan A, Lewis G. The association between academic pressure and adolescent mental health problems: A systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2023;339:302–17.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to extend our gratitude to Mr Paul Timothy Tan Bee Xian and Mr Jonathan Sim for their invaluable advice on the process of prompt engineering for the effective execution of this study.

Author information

Lei Zheng, Timothy Jie Han Sng and Chee Weng Yong contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

Bernadette Quah, Lei Zheng, Timothy Jie Han Sng, Chee Weng Yong & Intekhab Islam

Discipline of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National University Centre for Oral Health, 9 Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, Singapore

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

B.Q. contributed in the stages of conceptualization, methodology, study execution, validation, formal analysis and manuscript writing (original draft and review and editing). L.Z., T.J.H.S. and C.W.Y. contributed in the stages of methodology, study execution, and manuscript writing (review and editing). I.I. contributed in the stages of conceptualization, methodology, study execution, validation, formal analysis, manuscript writing (review and editing) and supervision. All authors provided substantial contributions to this manuscript in the following form:

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Intekhab Islam .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the university (REF: IRB-2023–1051). The waiver of consent from students was approved by the University’s Institutional Review Board, as the scores by ChatGPT were not used as the students’ actual grades, and all essay manuscripts were anonymized.

Consent for publication

All the authors reviewed the content of this manuscript and provided consent for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Quah, B., Zheng, L., Sng, T.J.H. et al. Reliability of ChatGPT in automated essay scoring for dental undergraduate examinations. BMC Med Educ 24 , 962 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05881-6

Download citation

Received : 04 February 2024

Accepted : 09 August 2024

Published : 03 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05881-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Artificial intelligence
• Academic performance
• Educational
• Educational needs assessment

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• General enquiries: [email protected]