Grading Rubric

This Assignment Design Rubric is a modification of Butler University's Course Design Rubric, a customized synthesis of several researched-based rubrics created by Butler’s University instructional designers.
This document is designed to guide the Assignment design practices and facilitate the formal or informal review of Assignments submitted for this PALNI grant project. It provides detailed explanations of each standard, offers helpful resources, specifies related research, and enables users to enter scores and feedback for each standard.

This Rubric may be used by academic staff for formal review, colleagues for informal review, or individual faculty for self-reflection. The Assignment reviewer should use each tab in this spreadsheet to score the Assignment design of a specific Assignment based on the quality-control standards and their associated explanations. To facilitate these Assignment reviews, only specific cells within the tabs are editable.

To meet quality standards at Butler University, Assignments should earn Demonstrated on at least 90% of the standards (40 of 44).

Generative AI Assignments Design Rubric available for viewing. If you wish to use the rubric, please make a copy.

In the Excel file, you will find xxxx tabs that define each section of the rubric tool.

The first, Score, clarifies the expected level of performance for quality Assignment design. This tab is automatically populated based on the scores manually added to the remaining tabs.

Subsequent tabs are organized based on the Rubric categories: Assignment Introduction, Assignment Organization, Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs), Assignment, Instructional Materials, and Inclusivity and Accessibility. Each tab contains design standards related to the category, specifies associated accrediting bodies' and nationally recognized standards, offers explanations to clarify best practices, and provides resources to assist with fulfilling the standard. The category tabs also provide a space to score the assignment review and offer feedback to the designer.

The final tab, References, lists resources used to create this Assignment Design Rubric.

If this tool is being used to conduct a Assignment review or self-evaluation, begin by entering the Assignment title (e.g. CH 362-01: Biochemistry I), term (e.g. Fall 2024), associated core component (if applicable), program, subject matter expert (SME) who designed the Assignment, and Assignment reviewer (who is scoring the Rubric) at the top of the AssignmentIntro tab. The information provided here will automatically populate subsequent category tabs.

Within each category tab, Assignment observers should carefully review each Standard and its associated Explanation before marking the checkbox to indicate the level of performance: Demonstrated, Needs More Development, and Not Evident. To earn Demonstrated, a Assignment should meet the standard at an 80% or higher level. Standards marked as Needs More Development indicate that the Assignment does not yet meet the standard, but has made attempts to do so. Standards noted as Not Evident signal that the reviewer was not able to find substantial evidence in the Assignment to confirm the Assignment design was attempting to meet that standard.

Assignment reviewers should also provide meaningful Evidence and Feedback. Comments should specify where in the Assignment the evidence for the standard exists and, in the spirit of continual improvement, also offer constructive, unbiased advice on how to further enhance the Assignment design.