reflection assignment rubric

• Schools & departments

Assessment rubrics

Rubrics allow for quicker and more consistent marking. This can be extremely helpful in reflection, which can feel as if it needs to be assessed by instinct alone. A well-defined rubric will make marking of reflection systematic and support both you and the reflectors.

Rubrics make life easier for the reflectors and for you as a marker

There are many general benefits from using a rubric, which extend beyond reflection. For facilitators a rubric can:

• help ensure consistency in the grades given
• reduce uncertainty which may come with grading
• reduce time spent grading
• identify clear strengths and weaknesses in work and therefore make feedback easier

Moreover, students report that having a well-defined rubric available before they engage with an assessment makes it clearer what is expected of them. Other benefits can be:

• More measurable feedback
• Students can more easily identify specific areas which they need to work on

Sometimes student work can fall outside the scope of a rubric – however a rubric will give you a place to start

While the usefulness of rubrics are widely accepted, there are some criticisms arguing that rubrics can fail to make the marking easier as students’ work does not fit onto the predefined categories and will have to be assessed holistically, rather than by a set of components. Moreover, it is argued that a piece of work is often more than the sum of its parts.

These are both fair criticisms. Sometimes you will receive reflections that are hard to mark against your criteria or are indeed better than your rubric would suggest. However, having a rubric will give you a place to start for these reflections.

If you find that your rubric consistently misses aspects this would suggest the criteria need updated.

Choose a holistic or analytic rubric – the analytic will make the benefits more pronounced

When choosing your rubric, there are two general approaches: holistic and analytical.

For each level of performance highlighted in the rubrics, it can be helpful to provide an example of that level (for example a series of reflective sentences or an extract).

Holistic rubrics are general levels of performance

The holistic rubric gives a general description of the different performance levels, for example novice, apprentice, proficient, or distinguished.

The levels can take many different names, and you can choose as many levels as you find appropriate. It can be recommended to include the same number of levels as the number of grades available for students, for example a level for failing and a level for each passing grade.

Analytic rubrics take into account performance on each assessment criterion

The analytic rubric allows you to identify a reflector’s performance against each of your chosen and well-defined assessment criteria.

This can be helpful for you in the marking process and when giving feedback to the reflector as you can tell them exactly what areas they are performing well in and need to improve on.

You may consider giving a student a mark for each criterion and take an average of that for the overall mark. Alternatively, predefine a weight or a set of points available for each criterion and calculate the overall mark according to this. If the latter method is used, you should also make the weightings available to students at the same time as the rubric.

Test your reflective rubric and improve it

It is unlikely that the first rubric you make is going to capture everything you need, and you may find you need to update it. This is natural for rubrics in all areas, and especially around the area of reflection, which for many is new.  Revisiting your rubric is particularly worth doing after the first time it is used.

When using your rubric you can ask yourself:

• What does this rubric make easier about marking and/or feedback (if anything)?
• What is still challenging when I am using this rubric?
• Are there clear gaps in my identified criteria or rubric which I now see are needed for what I consider essential in the assignment?
• What do I need to change (if anything)?
• How do students seem to react to my rubric?

Test if others would give students the same marks with your rubric

Rubrics that work well for you have a lot of value, but to ensure that you get an optimal rubric it is important that others using your rubric would give the same grade to the same reflection as you do – ensuring that your rubric has inter-rater reliability.

This is important for two reasons:

• It reinforces the validity of your rubric and ensures that, if there are multiple markers for your reflective assessments, the grade does not vary by which person is marking
• It ensures that students who see the rubric will be able to accurately produce work according to the level they are striving towards.

Holistic rubrics

Moon’s (2004) four levels of reflective writing.

These four levels distinguish between four types of written accounts you might see a reflector produce.

In this case the three top levels might pass a reflective assignment, where descriptive writing would not.

Taken from Jennifer Moon’s book: A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning (2004)

Reflective writing rubric

These four levels are different and highlight four alternative approaches to reflective journaling. While they are specifically developed for journal use, the levels will generalise to other types of written reflection.

The rubric is develop by Chabon and Lee-Wilkerson (2006) when evaluating reflective journals of students undertaking a graduate degree in communication sciences and disorders.

Analytical rubric

Reflection evaluation for learners’ enhanced competencies tool (reflect) rubric.

This analytic rubric has been developed and empirically tested and improved by Wald et al. (2012). It was developed specifically for medical education, but can easily be used elsewhere. The rubric is designed using theoretical considerations from a range of thinkers around reflection as Moon, Schön, Boud and Mezirow.

This rubric has been used in empirical studies and a high inter-rater reliability has been established.

There are two components to the rubric. The standard rubric and an additional axis. The second axis should be used when a reflector reaches ‘Critical reflection’ and then distinguishes between two types of learning, which reflection can help surface.

Adding the additional axis can help you to differentiate between what kind of learning the student has obtained as well as reminding us that reflection does not need to always create new practice – becoming aware of why one’s practice works can be equally valuable.

Standard Rubric

Axis II for critical reflection

Rubric for reflection using different criteria

This rubric form Jones (n.d) gives another approach to marking reflection. Using five criteria it manages to capture a lot of what is relevant when marking reflection as well as giving clear qualities highlighted for each level of reflection.

Chabon, S. and Lee-Wilkerson, D. (2006). Use of journal writing in the assessment of CSD students’ learning about diversity: A method worthy of reflection. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 27(3), 146-158.

Dawson, P. (2017) Assessment rubrics: towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347-360.

Jones, S. (n.d.) Using reflection for assessment . Office of Service Learning, IUPUI. (link to PDF on external site)

Moon J.A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. Routledge.

Kohn, A. (2006). The trouble with rubrics. English Journal, 95(4).

Wald, H.S., Borkan, J.M., Scott Taylor, J., Anthony, D., and Reis, S.P. (2012) Fostering and evaluating reflective capacity in medical education: Developing the REFLECT rubric for assessing reflective writing. Academic Medicine, 87(1), 41-50.

Academic Resources

• Academic Calendar
• Academic Catalog
• Academic Success
• BlueM@il (Email)
• Campus Connect
• Desire2Learn (D2L)

Campus Resources

• Campus Security
• Campus Maps

University Resources

• Technology Help Desk

Information For

• Alumni & Friends
• Current Students
• Faculty & Staff

Feedback & Grading

• Exit Tickets and Midterm Surveys
• Direct vs. Indirect Assessment
• Assessment and Bias
• Low-Stakes Assignments
• High-Stakes Assignments
• Types of Rubrics
• Creating Rubrics
• Evaluating Rubrics
• More Examples

Assessing Reflection

• Responding to Plagiarism
• Submitting Grades
• Teaching at DePaul
• Support Services
• Teaching Guides
• Technology Tools

Teaching Commons > Teaching Guides > Feedback & Grading > Rubrics > Assessing Reflection

Assessing reflection or reflective processes can be particularly challenging. A few examples of this challenge are:

• If reflection is meant to be a intimately personal experience, do we alter it simply by defining standards for assessment, making it a less personal and externally imposed process?
• Assessment of reflection depends on written or spoken language. How might this handicap students who are less familiar with conventional and discipline or context-specific linguistic expectations in a manner that has nothing to do with those students’ abilities to engage in refection?
• For example, will your students who are non-native speakers, or come from backgrounds with less exposure to common academic linguistic forms have a more difficult time demonstrating their ability to reflect well?

As there is not just one type of student in your classes/programs, there is not one answer to designing high quality assessment techniques for assessing reflection. You must design your reflection assignments as well as your assessments carefully considering your own context.

A few things to consider when you are designing your assessment strategies are:

• What is the purpose of the reflection?
• Are you interested in the process of reflection, the products of reflection or both?
• How will the assessment task itself promote reflection or reflective practices?
• How will you make judgements about reflection?
• How will you make it clear to students what you expect of them in terms of their reflection?

Examples of Models for Assessing Reflection

Hatton and smith (1995).

Hatton and Smith described four progressive levels of reflection, with each increased level indicating more/better reflective processes.

• Descriptive – this is not reflection, but simply describes events that occurred with no attempt to describe ‘why.’
• Descriptive Reflection – description includes reasons, but simply reports reasons.
• Dialogic Reflection – reflection as a personal dialogue (questioning, considering alternatives).
• wonder, what if, perhaps….
• Critical Reflection – takes into account context in which events occur, questions assumptions, considers alternatives, thinks about consequences of decisions/actions on others, and engages in reflective skepticism.

Ash and Clayton (2004)

Ash and Clayton describe a guided process for facilitating and assessing reflection. These researchers focus specifically on service learning, but their model could be applied to other types of learning experiences.

• Students describe the experience.
• Analyze the experience(s) from different categories of  perspectives based on the learning objective:
• Identify learning in each category
• Artic ulate learning by developing a well-developed statement of learning (articulated learni ng), using the four guiding questions that structure articulated learning as a guide:
• What did I learn?
• How, specifically, did I learn it?
• Why does this learning matter, or why is it significant?
• In what ways will I use this learning?
• Analyze/revise articulated le arning statements by applying standards of critical thinking through: 
• Student self-assessment
• Instructor feedback
• Finalize the articulated learning statements, aiming to fulfill all learning objectives in each categories and meet standards of critical thinking.
• Undertake new learning experiences, including when feasible, taking action on articulated learning statements to test the initial conclusions reached.
• Continue the reflection process, articulating additional complexity of the learning in articulated learning statements when possible.