Rubric Clarity and Perceived Fairness in Virtual Evaluations

Published Paper PDF: View PDF

Sumit Kumar

Independent Researcher

Delhi, India

Abstract

This study investigates the interplay between rubric clarity and students’ perceptions of fairness in virtual evaluations, a topic of growing importance as online learning environments expand rapidly. With the rise of digital platforms, educators face the dual challenge of maintaining transparency and consistency while adapting traditional assessment tools for remote delivery. Rubrics—structured scoring guides delineating performance criteria and achievement levels—are central to this endeavor. Yet, the effectiveness of rubrics hinges on their clarity: the precision of language, the concreteness of descriptors, and the accessibility of criteria. Ambiguities can lead to misunderstandings, erode trust, and prompt grade disputes. Through a convergent mixed‑methods approach, comprising a survey of 250 undergraduate and graduate students and four subsequent focus groups, this research probes three core questions: (1) How does overall rubric clarity influence perceptions of fairness? (2) Which specific rubric features—criterion specificity, descriptor detail, or ease of access—most strongly predict fairness judgments? (3) In what ways do student self‑efficacy and prior online learning experience moderate these relationships? Quantitative analyses reveal a robust positive correlation (r = .68, p < .001) between clarity scores and fairness perceptions, with descriptor specificity emerging as the single strongest predictor (β = .45, p < .01). Notably, students with lower self‑efficacy exhibit heightened sensitivity to rubric clarity, underscoring the need for particularly clear guidance for this group. Qualitative themes emphasize the desirability of illustrative exemplars, in‑platform rubric visibility during assessments, and alignment between rubric language and instructor feedback. By integrating these insights, educators can craft rubrics that not only measure learning outcomes effectively but also foster procedural justice, bolster student motivation, and reduce assessment anxiety. The study concludes with concrete recommendations for rubric design, including exemplar‑anchored descriptors, adaptive rubric interfaces in learning management systems, and orientation workshops to train students in rubric interpretation—strategies poised to enhance equity and trust in virtual education.

Keywords

Rubric clarity; perceived fairness; virtual evaluations; online assessment; educational equity

References

https://journals.sagepub.com/cms/10.1177/20539517221115189/asset/42c8dc21-bb14-43c3-a8da-de1978e6fe2b/assets/images/large/10.1177_20539517221115189-fig2.jpg
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351273026/figure/fig9/AS:1019045021241348@1619970674031/Flow-chart-of-the-virtual-evaluation-system.ppm
Andrade, H. (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53(1), 27–31. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.53.1.27-31
Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student perspectives on rubric‐referenced assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 12(3), 1–11.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In R. J. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard, & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 1, pp. 43–55). JAI Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brookhart, S. M. (1999). Developing understandable and meaningful rubrics. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(25), 1–4.
Conrad, R. M., & Donaldson, J. A. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction. Jossey-Bass.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002
Kuo, Y.-C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E., & Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.001
Liu, N.-F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510600680582
Mertler, C. A. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(25), 1–10.
Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). Pearson.
Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002
Reddy, Y. M., & Andrade, H. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902862859
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). NFER-NELSON.
Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2013). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning (2nd ed.). Stylus Publishing.