Handouts are available for download at the end of this page.

Video Transcript

Hi Science Teachers,

Welcome to Science Teacher Summer School, Episode 10.

I’m Kent Lui, and something you may not know about me is that one time, when I was younger, I wanted to trim some extra pounds off my gut. So, I gave up drinking pop and instead, decided to drink fruit juices. Needless to say, I didn’t lose any weight because fruit juices are high in sugar too. I think I may have actually gained some pounds doing it. Now, let’s get to work.

Today’s topic is about setting up your science rubrics – and specifically, the four column rubric. Rubrics are not new to science education; however, they have become more popular since science curricula have shifted towards more skills based and standards based assessment. Here in BC, we use a four column rubric to assess skills according to these four levels of ability in ascending order: Emerging (being the lowest), Developing, Proficient, and Extending being the top. The problem is defining the different levels of ability. When it comes to setting up rubrics, how can we efficiently define ability levels – especially between the top two – or proficient vs extending – levels?

First, don’t worry about having your rubric match exactly what your colleagues have. We’re all science teachers – we all studied science and know what good science looks like. And, chances are, our colleagues are looking for pretty much the same thing from their students as we are from ours. We just happen to word or classify it slightly differently than them. So, don’t worry about getting it “right”. I firmly believe we’re all pretty close to each other – and close is good enough.

However, I will be providing a sample rubric later if you want to see my categorizing in action.

When I start developing my rubrics, I define what “proficient” is. Proficient” is what a student needs to say or demonstrate in order to get an A. For a written test question, the “correct answer” is “proficient”. In a lab, “proficient” could mean, for example, creating a neat data table and taking down the measurements with correct units and significant digits. And, according to BC standards, for me, doing everything correctly is 2nd to the top of my rubric. So, what constitutes “extending” or the top column?

To me, extending means a student makes connections from other areas to this particular context. For example, for a written test question where I ask students to explain a phenomenon or provide an argument, I look for students to bring in examples from areas outside of the one being tested directly.

Finally, I hammer out the criteria for emerging and developing. Typically, it depends on how much stuff I asked for is missing. If most of what I’m looking for is missing, then it’s emerging. If one or two things are missing, then it’s developing.

For example, consider this rubric I have used to mark CER Statements.

First, a proficient CER statement starts with a definitive conclusion or argument, references data from the sources provided, and provides a logical explanation that is grounded in scientific knowledge for the phenomenon. An Extended CER statement would have everything under the Proficient column as well as a related, outside example. A developing CER statement would have a definitive conclusion but might not cite data or provide a logical explanation. An emerging CER statement would perhaps just have a definitive conclusion and nothing else.

Let’s see this rubric be used in a test question on evolution I gave my students this past year. I gave them this diagram on horse evolution; and, I asked them this question: is horse evolution an example of gradualism or punctuated equilibrium? Write an argument using the CER format.

A proficient statement would start with a definitive claim that horse evolution was an example of punctuated equilibrium. For evidence, they would say that the table provided shows hundreds of thousands if not millions of years between significant changes to the physical characteristics of the horse and they would provide specific details. For reasoning, they would say that these long stretches of no change was likely due to the environment remaining relatively unchanged for long periods of time – and, therefore, physical characteristics would remain unchanged. An extending statement may include everything just mentioned but may also compare horse evolution to other cases of punctuated equilibrium.

That’s all the time we have for this episode. Please leave questions in the comments section below. Join me next time, when I’ll be sharing how I start my first day of school. I’ll be sharing stuff that I used to do when I first started my career – and stuff I do now. You don’t want to miss it.

Thanks for watching. And, remember to science everywhere everyday.

Resources

Handout(s): Handout – CER Rubric

Our resources are free. We aren’t collecting emails for our resources. However, it would help us out if you liked us on our Facebook page and subscribed to our Youtube Channel. Thanks!