• <More on Intel.com

Assessing Thinking

Assessing thinking

Assessing Thinking that Occurs in the Showing Evidence Case

Assessing how students evaluate evidence and claims will vary greatly depending on the subject matter. The following rubric will help you start the discussion of what constitutes an effective argument. If you plan to use a rubric or other assessment tool, be sure your students understand the expectations by discussing your scoring guide—and even adapting it with student input—at the beginning of the project.

  Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Work
Evidence Evidence is clear, accurate, and well-selected. More than the minimum number of required supporting and opposing evidence is provided, which represents a well-rounded look at all sides of the case. Evidence is clearly and uniformly rated and explained. All evidence is properly documented. Evidence is clear, accurate, and matches the claim. The minimum number of required supporting and opposing evidence is provided, which represents the major arguments of the case. Evidence is uniformly rated and properly explained. Evidence is documented. Provides evidence for the claim, but may not address all necessary aspects. Meets the minimum number of required supporting evidence, but is missing some opposing evidence. The choice of evidence could be stronger. Evidence is rated and explained, but somewhat haphazardly. Most evidence is properly documented. Fails to provide convincing evidence for the claim. Student shows lack of understanding of proper documentation and evaluation.
Claim Claim is clearly stated, well-reasoned, and answers the prompt appropriately. Explanation of claim provides very good choice of details to clarify the one-sentence claim. The claim rating and explanation reflects realistic understanding of the body of evidence as a whole. Claim is clearly stated, explained, and answers the prompt. Explanation of claim sufficiently explains the one-sentence claim. The claim rating and explanation reflects a basic understanding of the body of evidence as a whole. Claim and explanation answers the prompt, but is somewhat unclear.  The rating and its explanation  may not show full understanding of topic/claim complexity. Claim is not clearly stated or is unfocused and does not directly answer the prompt.  Explanation and rating may be missing, lacking understanding, incomplete, or unrealistic.
Relational Evidence Student shows a clear and deep understanding of evidence in relation to the claim. Student shows a clear understanding of evidence in relation to their claim. Rationale of support (or non-support) may not reflect depth of understanding. Student shows a basic understanding of evidence in relation to their claim. Rationale of support (or non-support) often does not reflect depth of understanding. Student’s understanding of evidence/claim relationship is weak or inconsistent.  Rationale does not support rating.
Conclusion Conclusion reflects an excellent understanding of the depth and/or complexity of topic based upon evidence gathered. Possible counter  arguments are thoroughly addressed. Conclusion is clearly related to claim. Conclusion reflects a good understanding of topic based upon evidence gathered. Most of the important counter arguments are explained, but are limited in detail. Conclusion is related to claim. Conclusion reflects a basic understanding of topic based upon evidence gathered. Some counter arguments are included, but are not explained in depth. Conclusion is somewhat unclear as to how it relates to claim. Conclusion is not related to claim and/or does not show relationship between claim and evidence. Possible counter arguments are not addressed.