Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Rubric For Assessing Concept Maps

    Uploaded by

    Lëslìë Dücs Camins
    349 views1 page
    The rubric assesses concept maps based on 6 elements: 1) Breadth of the map and how many levels of concepts it describes from the domain. 2) How interconnected the concepts are and how many are linked to others. 3) How clearly and accurately the descriptive links convey relationships. 4) Whether each link type is distinct and consistently describes relationships. 5) Whether the layout is clear, hierarchical, and contained to a single page. 6) For maps built over time, how much cognitive progression is shown from the initial to final map.

    Original Description:

    Rubric for assessment

    Original Title

    Rubric for Assessing Concept Maps

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The rubric assesses concept maps based on 6 elements: 1) Breadth of the map and how many levels of concepts it describes from the domain. 2) How interconnected the concepts are and how many are linked to others. 3) How clearly and accurately the descriptive links convey relationships. 4) Whether each link type is distinct and consistently describes relationships. 5) Whether the layout is clear, hierarchical, and contained to a single page. 6) For maps built over time, how much cognitive progression is shown from the initial to final map.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    349 views1 page

    Rubric For Assessing Concept Maps

    Uploaded by

    Lëslìë Dücs Camins
    The rubric assesses concept maps based on 6 elements: 1) Breadth of the map and how many levels of concepts it describes from the domain. 2) How interconnected the concepts are and how many are linked to others. 3) How clearly and accurately the descriptive links convey relationships. 4) Whether each link type is distinct and consistently describes relationships. 5) Whether the layout is clear, hierarchical, and contained to a single page. 6) For maps built over time, how much cognitive progression is shown from the initial to final map.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Rubric for Assessing Concept Maps (Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo)

    Concept map element Excellent Good Poor Failing

    Breadth of net Map includes the important Map includes most Important concepts missing Map includes minimum
    concepts and describes important concepts; and/or describes domain on concepts with many
    domain on multiple levels describes domain on only one level important concepts
    limited number of levels missing

    Embeddedness and inter- All concepts interlinked Most concepts interlinked Several concepts linked to Few concepts linked to
    connectedness with several other concepts with other concepts other concepts other concepts

    Use of descriptive links Links succinctly and Links are descriptive and Some links unclear or Links are vague; show
    accurately describe all valid for most vague; some invalid or inconsistent relationships
    relationships relationships unclear

    Efficient links Each link type is distinct Most links are distinct Several links are Most links synonymous or
    from all others, clearly from others; discriminate synonymous; don't vaguely describe
    describes relationship; used concepts; present variety discriminate concepts well; relationships and aren't
    consistently of relationships; used don't show a variety of distinct from other links
    fairly consistently relationships; used
    inconsistently

    Layout Map is contained in a single Map is contained in a Map is not contained in a Map is not contained in a
    page, has multiple clear single page, has several single page, has unclear single page, is confusing to
    hierarchies, is well laid out clear hierarchies, is fairly hierarchies, is poorly laid read with no hierarchical
    and provides a sufficient well laid out and provides out and provides some organization
    number of relevant a sufficient number of fairly relevant examples
    examples with links fairly relevant examples with links
    with links

    Development over time Final map shows Final map shows some Final map shows minimal Final map shows no
    (where a concept map is considerable cognitive cognitive progression cognitive progression from significant cognitive
    built incrementally as the progression from Base map from Base map and a Base map and a slightly progression from Base
    term progresses and new and a significantly greater somewhat greater depth greater depth of map and no increase in the
    concepts are learned) depth of understanding of of understanding of the understanding of the understanding of the
    the domain domain domain domain

    Based on the concept map rubric found at KITE (University of Missouri), with additions by Josephine McMurray

    You might also like