Abstract
This column examines the role of rubrics in evaluating gifted students’ performance as a part of examining issues surrounding the overall evaluation of gifted programs. The author examines how rubrics can be responsive to the group of gifted students and still be cognizant of the individual gifted learner who has specific talents, potential, and abilities. Three issues relating to the use of rubrics are discussed: verbiage, point allocations, and student voice.
“. . . RUBRICS CAN BE RESPONSIVE TO THE GROUP OF GIFTED STUDENTS AND STILL BE COGNIZANT OF THE INDIVIDUAL GIFTED LEARNER WHO HAS SPECIFIC TALENTS, POTENTIAL AND ABILITIES.”
The use of rubrics as an assessment tool has been recognized for the clarity, standardization, and equity they provide for all learners. It also has been noted by some educators of the gifted that rubrics have reduced and even eradicated some of the skepticism of educators and students regarding issues of academic favoritism toward the efforts and performance outcomes of gifted students. Some educators of the gifted have remarked that the articulation of distinct categorical referents specific to rubrics, describing the qualities and levels of performance deemed as “outstanding,” have served as motivational sources to gifted learners. There is little question that rubrics have minimized the subjectivity of assessment; however, there is some concern that the orientation of what is considered to be “outstanding” work is generalizable and thus may be a sufficient means of recognizing and responding to gifted learners as a group as opposed to recognizing and responding to gifted students as individuals within a group. It is this latter point that emerges as a question regarding the use of rubrics for gifted learners: How can rubrics be responsive to the group of gifted students and still be cognizant of the individual gifted learner who has specific talents, potential, and abilities?
Issues Related to the Use of Rubrics
There are three issues of particular concern that relate to the use of rubrics relative to a given assignment and the evaluative needs and performance of the gifted. Each of these is relative to the traits characterizing giftedness with some ramifications for all learners. Each of these issues can be resolved by considering a set of options particular to the development and use of rubrics.
The Content-Specific Use of Verbiage
Specific language and descriptors have been associated with the design and subsequent utilization of rubrics. For example, “Accuracy,” “Clarity,” and “Quality of References” are valued indicators of expectations relative to the task or assignment being evaluated. However, the descriptors selected for these terms are often generalized and not discipline-specific. For example, the meaning of “clarity” in a research paper related to history could be defined differently from the meaning of “clarity” related to scientific research. Such nuances of verbiage within the context of the rubric can be misunderstood as an indicator of success when applied to one discipline versus another. The presentation of terminology on the rubric could affect the meaning of “good work” for gifted students who are learning and working in a particular domain or discipline.
A solution to this issue could be the justification for creating multiple layers of meaning related to the key terms defining the different levels of success within the rubric. Multiple layers of meaning to interpret each of the descriptors could alleviate the misunderstanding that ensues when the terms are generalized rather than specifically oriented to different disciplines that gifted learners might be studying. An incidental but important consideration in affirming the specificity of the verbiage used as rubric descriptors is the need to create language patterns within the rubric that address individual differences or individualization with a task or performance. Another consideration is the need to verify that the verbiage in any rubric reflects the language that underscores the concepts and skills of differentiation.
The Point Allocation Within the Rubric
In a classroom situation where the score to achieve a specific grade is associated with points accumulated from rubric tabulations over multiple assignments, it has been noted that gifted students who have achieved the points for an A, for example, do not concern themselves with rubric scores after that point. As one student said, “I can relax on this assignment because I have already earned the A I need from other assignments I completed this semester.”
One means to attend to this issue is to add a component of self-evaluation to the existing rubrics. The shift in emphasis from completing an assignment with the intent of accumulating points to defining the “self” in relationship to the assignment is a valued consideration for the development of a “scholar” and “intellectual.” Such a shift in emphasis also develops a different frame of reference for the production of one’s work. A companion self-awareness or self-assessment rubric that measures the affective component of the learning process could facilitate emphasis on not only what was accomplished but also on how it was accomplished or the personal role of the learner in learning to learn.
Student Voices in the Development of Rubrics
The dependency of gifted students on the criteria imposed by “others” to measure their success is reinforced by some educators and situations. There is a need for gifted students to articulate the criteria that outline success for their own work. Although the discussion about individualization and personalization with respect to the gifted individual is replete in the literature, it is often ignored in curriculum and instructional practices. This goal can be accomplished by the involvement of students in the identification of descriptors and definitions of the terminology and their placement along the continuum of success that defines the rubric to be used to assess their work. Presenting the students with an opportunity to outline and describe the goals for an assignment, task, or project involves them as evaluators as well as producers. This alignment should enhance the value and provide a greater investment and personal attachment to the work that gifted students produce.
Conclusion
The support for the design and use of general rubrics is not a point to be argued any more than the argument for the general design and use of standards or basic curriculum for all students. However, just as there is a need to differentiate the standards that have been defined for general education for gifted students, there is a similar need to redefine or differentiate the rubrics so that they are aligned to the desired outcomes of gifted education.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Bio
Sandra N. Kaplan, EdD, is a clinical professor at the University of Southern California and past-president of the National Association for Gifted Children. She may be reached at University of Southern California, Rossier School of Education, Waite Phillips Hall 504G, Los Angeles, CA 90089.