Performance measures, like the rubrics and
rating or evaluation forms provided below, are assessment instruments
which directly rely upon the application of informed and unbiased
judgment. Typically a rubric or rating form has high face validity
in terms of the apparent relevance of the items, classifications,
or descriptors to the target concept. Rating forms can be refined
over time to be sure that all the essential elements to a good or
bad rating are included in the rubric or rating form and so that
all the differences which are regarded as important can be dully
noted.
Professionals
who are experienced in a given domain of practice or in a given
subject field find these tools valuable. Tools of this kind readily
can capture the target idea, behavior, traits, or qualities that
people are interested in evaluating. Faculty may use rubrics to
rate student work, as when assessing the learning outcomes evident
in students' portfolios or essays. Supervisors may use rating forms
to record their evaluations of employees' work performances, as
when making quality control inspections. Judges may use these tools
to rate the relative quality of athletic performances, as in gymnastics
or figure skating.
However
tools of this kind, if not properly used, can yield seriously unreliable
results. Prior to using the tool even experienced evaluators engage
in a process which leads to consensus judgments regarding which
sorts of things should be classified or rated in what ways. If consensus
is not reached widely divergent ratings might be assigned by judges
who are applying the very same evaluation tool to the very same
behavior, object, person, performance, etc. Care should be taken
explicitly to practice with paradigm cases and to come to agreement
on how these cases measure up before applying a rubric or rating
form to an actual evaluation or assessment.
