Volume 4, Number 4        April 17, 2001        ISSN 1099-839X 
 

 

The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

 
Heidi Goodrich Andrade 

Ohio University 

 
This study examines the impact of instructional rubrics on eighth grade students' 

writing and on their knowledge of the qualities of effective writing. Students in 

the treatment group were given instructional rubrics that articulated the criteria 

and gradations of quality for three assigned essays. Students in the control group 

wrote the same three essays but did not receive the rubric. Students in the 

treatment group received, on average, higher scores on one of the three essays. 

Questionnaires administered at the end of the study revealed that students in the 

treatment group tended to identify more of the criteria by which their writing 

was evaluated. 

Rubrics are currently among the most 

popular innovations in education (Goodrich Andrade, 

2000; Goodrich, 1997a, 1997b; Jensen, 1995; Ketter, 

1997; Luft, 1997; Popham, 1997), but little research 

on their effectiveness has been undertaken. 

Moreover, few of the existing research efforts have 

focused on the ways in which rubrics can serve the 

purposes of learning and thinking as well as meet the 

demands of evaluation and accountability. The study 

described in this paper investigates the impact of 

instructional rubrics on students' written 

compositions and on their knowledge of the qualities 

of effective writing. 

A rubric is usually a one- or two-page 

document that lists the criteria for a specific 

assignment and describes varying levels of quality, 

from excellent to poor. "Instructional rubrics" are 

rubrics that have been explicitly designed to support 

as well as to evaluate student learning (Goodrich 

Andrade, 2000). Instructional rubrics have several 

features that support learning: 

 they are written in language that students 
can understand; 

 they define and describe quality work; 

 they refer to common weaknesses in 
students' work and indicate how such 

weaknesses can be avoided, and; 

 they can be used by students to assess their 
works-in-progress and thereby guide 

revision and improvement. 

Although the format of an instructional 

rubric can vary, most rubrics have two features in 

common: 

1. a list of criteria, or what counts in the 
evaluations of a project or assignment, and 

2. gradations of quality, or descriptions of 
strong, middling and problematic work. 

Table 1 [see “Scoring Rubric for Persuasive 

Essay Rubric” in Appendix B] contains one of the 

instructional rubrics used in this study. Like each of 

the rubrics used, it draws on district, state and 

national standards as well as on feedback from 

teachers and researchers. It accompanied the 

following persuasive essay assignment: 

The State of California has a law that all 

students must be educated until 16 years of age. This 

law passed after some debate. Some people thought it 

was a good law, some didn't. Put yourself in these 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
lawmakers' shoes and argue either for or against this 

law. In a 5-paragraph essay, be sure to:  

 form an opinion on this issue and support it 
with strong arguments and relevant 

information, and 

 use your knowledge of democracy to explain 
how having or not having such a law would 

affect a democratic society like ours. 

This rubric was designed to promote the 

development of writing skills by describing effective, 

genre-specific writing as well as the kinds of 

problems that students commonly experience as they 

write. Genre-specific criteria are helpful as guidelines 

for student writers because they "announce what is to 

be achieved in clear and useful language" (Cooper, 

1999, p. 31). For example, the Considers Reasons 

Against the Claim criterion reminds students to 

acknowledge a perspective opposite their own and 

explain how this perspective is lacking. Research 

shows that students (as well as adults) tend not to 

consider contrary arguments (Perkins, Jay & 

Tishman, 1993), not because they can't do it but 

rather because they don't think about doing it. 

Including this criterion cues students to attend to an 

important component of a persuasive essay. The 

overarching principle here is that a rubric which 

reflects and reveals problems that students commonly 

experience provides more informative feedback than 

one that either describes mistakes they do not 

recognize or that defines levels of quality so vaguely 

as to be meaningless (e.g., "poorly organized" or 

"boring"). 

The Persuasive Essay instructional rubric 

was also designed to support the use of reasoning 

skills. The second and third criteria, Reasons in 

Support of the Claim and Reasons Against the Claim, 

give the rubric an emphasis on critical thinking—an 

emphasis missing from many rubrics. These two 

criteria inform students that critical thinking must be 

demonstrated in their essays and attempt to guide 

them in how (and how not) to do it. 

Theoretical Framework 

The hypothesis for this study is that 

instructional rubrics can have positive effects on 

students' writing and learning about writing. This 

hypothesis draws on several areas of cognitive and 

educational research, including authentic assessment, 

self-regulated learning, and the teaching and 

evaluation of writing. Perspectives on authentic 

assessment provide a guiding definition of 

assessment as an educational tool that serves the 

purposes of learning as well as the purposes of 

evaluation (Gardner, 1991; Hawkins et al., 1993; 

Shepard, 2000; Wiggins, 1989a, 1989b; Wolf & 

Pistone, 1991). The literature on self-regulated 

learning and feedback suggests that learning 

improves when feedback informs students of the need 

to monitor their learning and guides them in how to 

achieve learning objectives (Bangert-Drowns et al., 

1991; Butler and Winne, 1995). Similarly, the 

literature on assessing writing recommends 

distinguishing between evaluation and grading by 

having students engage in a process of ongoing 

evaluation that provides precise and detailed 

information about what is expected for a particular 

assignment, as well as guidance on how students can 

improve their writing on that assignment (Cooper, 

1999; Cooper & Odell, 1999; White, 1994; White, 

2000). 

Taken together, theory and research on 

assessment, self-regulation, and feedback suggests 

that instructional rubrics have the potential to 

scaffold students' writing if the rubrics and the 

writing assignment have certain characteristics. They 

must: 

 articulate clear, genre-specific criteria for 
the assignment; 

 provide guidance in meeting the criteria; 

 provide opportunities for improvement 
through revision; 

 be sensitive to students' developmental 
readiness by referring to appropriate grade 

level standards. 

In this study, these principles for effective 

assessment were implemented by giving students 

instructional rubrics like the one in Table 1. The 

other rubrics that were used and their accompanying 

assignments can be found in Appendix A. 

Research Questions and Methods 

 This study was motivated by two research 

questions. The first question is: Does providing 

students with instructional rubrics affect their 

knowledge of the qualities of effective writing? A 

written questionnaire was used to uncover students' 

beliefs about "what counts" when evaluating an 

essay. The questionnaire consisted of one question; 

"When your teachers read your essays and papers, 

how do they decide whether your work is excellent 

(A) or very good (B)?" The question, which was 

borrowed from a study conducted by Dr. W. Haney 

of Boston College (personal communication, July 29, 

1996), allowed for an examination of students' 

knowledge of the criteria by which their writing was 

evaluated and, by extension, of the qualities that 

define effective writing. 

This study's second research question is: 

Does providing students with instructional rubrics 

affect the quality of their writing? This question was 

investigated by creating two groups of students—

those who received an instructional rubric and those 

who did not—and comparing the average scores 



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

3 

 

received on the essays written by each group. In this 

way, it was possible to determine, at least in broad 

stroke, whether or not rubrics can have a measurable 

effect on student writing. 

Sample 

This project was supported by the Edna 

McConnell Clark Foundation, which asked that the 

work be carried out in schools with which the 

foundation collaborates. As a result, the research was 

conducted in nine eighth-grade classes in two very 

different middle schools in Southern California. One 

of the schools (School A) is located in an upper 

middle class, largely professional, suburban 

neighborhood with little ethnic diversity. Many of the 

non-White students that attended School A were 

bussed in from adjacent communities and tended to 

be placed in lower level classes. The language arts 

teachers with whom I worked in School A designed 

their curricula independently of each other. School B, 

in contrast, is located in an ethnically and 

linguistically diverse, working class, urban 

community. The teachers with whom I worked at 

School B collaborated on an integrated curriculum 

that combined history and language arts. Their shared 

Humanities curriculum drew explicitly on the 

district's standards and an experimental new portfolio 

process. 

The combined sample from both schools 

included 242 students. Half of the students were boys 

and half were girls. One hundred and twenty-one 

(50.0%) were Latino, 86 (35.5%) were White, 31 

(12.8%) were Black, and 4 (1.7%) were of Asian 

descent (Filipino, Chinese, Vietnamese, Cambodian 

or Laotian). Approximately 8% of the students were 

considered to have special educational needs, and 6% 

were identified as students for whom English was a 

second language (ESL). The average 

Humanities/language arts grade for the term prior to 

this study was 75.9% (or a C). One hundred and 

forty-one of the students in the sample attended 

School A and 101 attended School B. 

Procedure 

The study spanned the 1996-97 school year. 

Students were asked to write three different essays 

approximately one month apart. Each assignment was 

designed to meet the individual school's curriculum 

and evaluation needs, so students in the two schools 

were twice assigned different essays. The first 

assignment for both schools was a persuasive essay. 

The second assignment was an autobiographical 

journey essay at School B, and an essay entitled "Oh, 

The Places We'll Go" in School A. School A's second 

essays were not included in this study because of 

problems in the implementation of the assignment. 

The third and final assignment was a historical fiction 

essay in School B, and an essay about a personal 

challenge in School A. 

Before writing a first draft of each essay, 

students in the treatment classes were given an 

instructional rubric. As principle investigator, I 

introduced the rubric to students during one class 

period in one of the treatment classrooms while the 

teachers observed. The teachers of the treatment 

classes then introduced the rubric to their own classes 

while I observed. Students in both the treatment and 

control classes were asked to write first and second 

drafts of the essays, but the students in the control 

group were not given a rubric. 

Approximately three weeks after the 

completion of the third essay, all students were asked 

to write a narrative response to the one-question 

questionnaire. 

Dependent Measures 

Data were collected on two dependent 

variables: 1) students' responses to the written 

questionnaire, and 2) students' scores on the essays 

written for this study. Three of the four classes at 

School A and all five classes at School B filled out 

and returned the questionnaires at the end of the 

study, for a total of 196 complete questionnaires. I 

analyzed students' narrative responses to the 

questionnaire by noting all of the qualities of writing, 

or criteria, to which students referred, such as 

spelling, neatness, organization, "good ideas," and 

"whether [the teacher] likes me or not." 

Three research assistants and I scored the 

essays. None of the research assistants had a 

background in research or writing and none were able 

to score more than one collection of essays, 

necessitating rather lengthy training periods and 

extended attempts to reach reliability for each 

assignment. We always began by reviewing the 

rubric for the assignment in order to come to 

agreement on the precise definition of terms and to 

"unpack" overlapping criteria. The resulting 

adaptations did not significantly change the meaning 

of the rubric, but aided in achieving scoring 

reliability. See Appendix B for the rubrics that we 

used to score the essays. 

Each essay was scored on each criterion, 

then an average score was calculated. A total of one 

hundred and six persuasive essays were scored. 

Because of implementation problems in School A, 

the second essay written for this study was not used. 

Thirty-seven autobiographical incident essays from 

School B were scored. One hundred and sixty 

historical fiction/personal challenge essays were 

scored. 

Reliability was checked by testing the 

correlation between the average scores assigned by 

two raters, and by determining the Cohen's kappa for 



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
the scores given for each criterion on the rubric. 

(Cohen's kappa is a measure of percentage agreement 

corrected for chance agreement: k = Po - Pe / 1 - Pe. ) 

Comparing only the average score would have 

produced higher rates of agreement but would also 

have masked disagreements about how students 

performed on the individual criteria. For the 

persuasive essay, a correlation of .93 and a Cohen's 

kappa of 70% were achieved by the two raters on the 

first twenty-six essays scored. For the 

autobiographical incident essay, the raters scored 

twenty-two essays together. A correlation of .73 and 

a Cohen's kappa of 60% agreement were achieved for 

the last six essays. For the historical fiction and 

personal challenge essays, the raters achieved a 

Cohen's kappa of 67% and a correlation of .74 after 

scoring thirty-five essays together. At the conclusion 

of this study the research assistants and I revised the 

scoring process, and a subsequent study (in 

preparation) had far higher rates of agreement. For 

the purposes of this study, however, the above rates 

of agreement were considered low but adequate. 

Independent Measures 

Data were also collected on several 

independent measures, including school attended, 

teacher, grade level, gender, ethnicity, previous 

performance in English as measured by standardized 

test scores and grades, and identification as ESL or a 

student with special needs. 

Analysis 

I analyzed the questionnaires by noting the 

criteria to which students referred, including 

academically relevant qualities like content and 

spelling, and academically irrelevant influences such 

as whether or not the work was turned in on time. I 

compared the kind of criteria referenced by students 

in the treatment and control groups to each other and 

to the criteria contained in the rubrics used in the 

study. The responses from students in School A and 

School B were analyzed separately because the 

students in the control group at School B had had 

previous exposure to rubrics used by their teacher. 

The equivalence of the treatment and control 

groups on each of the independent variables was 

assessed using chi-square tests for categorical 

variables and t tests for continuous variables. The two 

groups were equivalent in terms of gender (x
2
 = .002, 

p = .96), ethnicity (x
2
 = 6.76, p = .24), number of 

students with special needs (x
2
 = .05, p = .82), 

number of ESL students (x
2
 = .62, p = .43), and 

previous grades in English/language arts (t = .02, p = 

.99). Because School A and School B used different 

standardized tests with different scales, equivalence 

in terms of standardized test scores was determined 

by comparing the treatment and control groups in 

each school to each other. At School A, the treatment 

and control groups were equivalent (t = -.34, p = .74). 

At School B, the control group had, on average, 

higher scores and the difference approached 

statistical significance (t = 1.91, p = .06). As a result, 

the sample at School B was biased against the 

treatment and the findings were likely to represent a 

conservative estimate of the treatment effect. For this 

reason, standardized test score (Test) was included as 

a high priority control variable in the multiple 

regression model building process. 

Multiple linear regression was used to 

understand the relationship between the treatment, 

the independent variables, and the essay scores. The 

main effect of each predictor and its interaction with 

the treatment and with gender were tested. The effect 

of a predictor was considered statistically significant 

if its p value was < .05. Residual plots from the 

multiple regression models were inspected 

throughout the model building process to ensure that 

the assumptions of linearity, normality and 

homoscedasticity had not been violated. 

Questionnaires 

The analysis of students' responses to the 

questionnaire revealed striking differences between 

the treatment and control groups. The students in the 

control group at School A tended to mention fewer 

and more superficial criteria such as spelling, 

punctuation, and neatness, if they mentioned any 

specific criteria at all: 

Well, they give us the assignment and they 

 know the qualifications and if you have all 

 of them you get an A and if you don't get 

 any you get a F and so on. 

Note that this student knows that the teacher 

has her standards or "qualifications" but he does not 

suggest that he knows what they are. Students in the 

treatment group, in contrast, tended to mention the 

same criteria to which the control group referred plus 

a variety of others, including criteria contained in the 

rubrics used in this study: 

Student 1: The teacher gives us a paper 

 called a rubric. A rubric is a paper of 

 information of how to do our essays good to 

 deserve an A. If they were to give it an A it 

 would have to be well organized, neat, good 

 spelling, no errors and more important, the 

 accurate information it gives. For a B it's 

 neat, organized, some errors and pretty good 

 information but not perfect. 

Student 2: An A would consist of a lot of 

 good expressions and big words. He/she also 

 uses relevant and rich details and examples. 

 The sentences are clear, they begin in 

 different ways, some are longer than others, 

 and no fragments. Has good grammar and 



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

5 

 

 spelling. A B would be like an A but not as 

 much would be on the paper. 

With the exception of "neat," all of the 

criteria referred to by these two students were 

included in the rubrics used in this study. Some of the 

criteria are quoted exactly as they were written in the 

rubric (e.g., "... sentences are clear, they begin in 

different ways..."), while others are paraphrased (e.g., 

"big words"). 

Table 2 is a list of the criteria from the 

rubrics that were mentioned by students in the 

treatment group at School A but not by students in 

the control group. The numbers to the left represent 

the number of times each criterion was mentioned by 

students in the treatment group. Students in the 

control group at School A did not refer to any of 

these eleven criteria, even by chance. 

 

Table 2 

 

Criteria Contained in Rubrics and Referenced by 

Students in the Treatment Group but Not by Students 

in the Control Group at School A (n = 74). 

No. of 

references 

Criterion 

20 Word choice, e.g., "words give [the 

reader] a vivid picture in her mind" 

8 Voice, reveals feelings and emotions 

7 Interesting, not boring 

3 Has accurate information 

3 Provides details 

2 Is descriptive 

2 Uses proper paragraph format 

2 Includes ideas, thoughts and opinions 

2 Makes a point 

2 Is well-organized, e.g., ";has a 

beginning, middle and end" 

1 Sentence structure 

 

The results from School B are a little 

different because the students in the control group 

were accustomed to using rubrics. Seven students in 

the control class referred to the use of rubrics in their 

responses, even though they were not given the 

rubrics used in this study. Nonetheless, small 

differences in the treatment and control groups at 

School B were found. Table 3 is a list of the criteria 

contained in the rubrics used in this study and 

mentioned by students in the treatment group but not 

by students in the control group at School B. 

 

Table 3 

 

Criteria Contained in Rubrics and Referenced by 

Students in the Treatment Group but Not by Students 

in the Control Group at School B (n = 122). 

No. of 

references 
Criterion 

4 Word choice, "powerful words," 

"vividness" 

4 Organization 

3 Length, five paragraphs 

3 Gives details 

2 Tells about action and events 

2 Is easy to understand 

2 Ideas and content 

1 Setting 

1 The way the writing flows 

1 Makes a point 

1 Voice 

1 Sentence fluency 

1 Tells about lessons learned 

1 Contains correct information 

 

Discussion of Questionnaires 

When compared to the responses of students 

in the control group, students in the treatment group 

tended to refer to a greater variety of academically 

relevant criteria for effective writing. These 

differences suggest that the students who received the 

three instructional rubrics had more (if not complete) 

knowledge of what counts in writing and of the 

criteria by which their essays were evaluated. It 

appears that instructional rubrics have the potential to 

at least broaden students' conceptions of effective 

writing beyond mechanics to include qualities such as 

word choice, voice and tone. However, the results of 

the essay scores discussed in the following section 

suggest that, predictably, transferring students' new 

knowledge about effective writing to the composition 

of written essays is more difficult. 

 



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
Essay Scores 

Table 4 lists the final regression models for 

each of the essays. The parameter estimates and p-

values for the treatment condition reveal that there 

was a positive effect of treatment on the second essay 

(the autobiographical journey) but not the first or 

third essays. Interestingly, the negative parameter 

estimate for the interaction between treatment and 

gender for the third essay (historical fiction/personal 

challenge) indicates that there may have been a 

negative effect of treatment on girls' scores but no 

effect for boys. 

 

Table 4 

 

Parameter Estimates from Final Regression Models 

(See also Appendix D) 

 
Essay 1 

n = 106 

Essay 2 

n = 37 

Essay 3 

n = 160 

Intercept 1.57*** 2.18** 1.62*** 

Trt_Cntrl 0.0009 0.49** 0.12 

Grades 0.01*** -0.005 0.009* 

Test 0.010* 0.01~ 0.009~ 

Teacher -0.100**     

School 0.300~ (N/A) 0.22* 

Gender   -1.78~ 0.51* 

Grades*Gender   0.02~   

Ethnicity     0.20~ 

Trt*Gender     -0.43~ 

R
2
 % 25 40 19 

~ p < .10 

* p < .05 

** p < .01 

*** p < .001 

 

Essay 1. There was no measurable effect of 

the treatment on students' scores on the persuasive 

essay. The only statistically significant effects come 

from variables with traditionally robust predictive 

power: previous performance in English, teacher, and 

school attended. 

Essay 2. Because of implementation 

difficulties at School A during the writing of the "Oh, 

The Places We'll Go" essay, only the 

autobiographical essays from School B were scored. 

The results show that, controlling for grades, test 

scores, gender, and an interaction between grades and 

gender, students in the treatment group are predicted 

to score, on average, almost half a point higher on a 

4-point scale than students in the control group. 

Figure 1 summarizes the effect of treatment 

graphically. 

 

 
Figure 1. Relationship between essay scores, 

ASAT scores and gender for Essay 2, 

autobiographical incident (n=37). 
 

The essays in Appendix C reveal some of 

the differences in the autobiographical journey essays 

written by students in the treatment and control 

groups. In general, the treatment essays attend more 

carefully to the purpose of the journey, character 

development, dialogue, action, paragraph breaks, and 

conventions. That is not to say that the treatment 

essays always deal with these criteria effectively; 

some attempts to meet the requirements of the rubric 

are limited and/or clunky. For example, the use of 

dialogue is usually minimal ("Then my dad said, 

'Shut up or I'll turn around and drive straight home'"), 

and the lessons learned are often tacked on to the end 

of the essays as afterthoughts ("I learned a valuable 

lesson that day which was, 'Never do anything, that 

you now you're going to get in trouble for and 

regrete.'"). Nonetheless, the student writers in the 

treatment group were clearly attending to the criteria 

on the rubric and, by attempting to meet them, 

learning about writing. Although the teacher of the 

control group had had her students write down the 

criteria for the autobiographical essay, they did not 

have the full rubric at their elbows as they wrote, and 

their writing reveals fewer explicit attempts to fulfill 

the criteria. 

Essay 3. The analyses of last two essays, 

historical fiction and personal challenge, were 

collapsed because the effect of treatment did not 

differ by school. Since the main effect of treatment is 

not statistically significant, there are no measured 

overall differences in essay scores between the 

treatment and control groups, controlling for the 

other variables (t = .72, p = .47). The main effect of 

gender is statistically significant (t = 2.22, p = .03), 

which shows that, on average, girls are predicted to 

file:///D:/CIE/Volumes%20&%20Issues/cie-archive/2001,%20Vol%204,%20%231-7/number4/index.html%23appendixc


The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

7 

 

score .51 points higher than boys, controlling for 

grades, test scores, and ethnicity. However, the 

interaction between treatment and gender approaches 

statistical significance (t = -1.76, p = .08), suggesting 

that the effect of treatment may be different for girls 

and boys. For boys, there was no statistically 

significant difference between the average essay 

scores for the treatment and control groups. Girls in 

the treatment group, in contrast, tended to score .31 

points lower than girls in the control group, 

controlling for grades, test scores, school and 

ethnicity. Thus, it appears that there may be a 

negative effect of the treatment on girls' scores for 

this essay. Figure 2 represents this relationship 

graphically. 

 

 
Figure 2. Relationship between essay scores, grades 

and gender fr Essay 3, historical fiction/personal 

challenge (n=160). 

 

Discussion of Essay Scores 

Findings from the analysis of the essay 

scores paint an uneven but intriguing pattern of 

results. In general, it appears that simply handing out, 

reviewing and explaining instructional rubrics can 

orient students toward the criteria for writing as 

communicated by the rubric and can help students 

write to those criteria, but that a more intensive 

intervention may be necessary in order to help all 

students perform at higher levels consistently. 

The lack of a treatment effect for the first 

assignment—the persuasive essay—may be due to 

several factors. For one, it was many teachers' and 

students' first exposure to a rubric. Only one of the 

eight teachers participating in this study had 

previously used rubrics: they may not have been 

adequately prepared to support students in their use. 

This is also a likely explanation for the fact that the 

teacher variable had an effect on scores on the first 

essay but not on the second or third essays: by the 

second essay, each of the teachers and their classes 

had at least some familiarity with rubrics. 

A second reason for the lack of an effect of 

the treatment on the first essay may be that the rubric 

itself was not written in particularly student-friendly 

terms. The second and third rubrics were written in 

more accessible language. A third reason for the lack 

of an effect may be that the students did not have 

enough time to revise the essays. Several teachers 

reported that the three days the students were given to 

write and revise was inadequate. Students were given 

five days to write essays two and three. Finally, a 

power calculation suggested that this sample (n = 

106, control group n = 30) only had a power of 31% 

to detect a small effect of treatment even at the 

relaxed alpha level of .10. A larger sample size may 

or may not have detected an effect. 

Findings from the second assignment—the 

autobiographical essay—are positive yet conditional. 

On the one hand, the magnitude of the between-group 

differences for the second essay appears to be 

educationally as well as statistically meaningful. An 

average of a half-point difference on a 4-point scale 

is a 12.5% difference. This effect is all the more 

meaningful because of the minimal amount of 

classroom time taken by the intervention: less than 

forty minutes was spent on introducing and reviewing 

each rubric. On the other hand, the sample size for 

the second essay is limited (n = 37, treatment = 26, 

control = 11), so firm conclusions are not warranted. 

The findings from the third assignment—the 

historical fiction and personal challenge essays—

stand in partial contrast to the findings from the 

second assignment. Assignment 3 results indicate that 

instructional rubrics may actually be related to a 

detriment to the performance of girls but not boys. 

However, it is possible that the results of the last 

essay were confounded by end-of-the-year pressures. 

Teachers at both schools reported that the third essay 

assignment came just as their students were 

attempting to meet new, district mandated portfolio 

and exhibition requirements for graduation. One 

teacher referred to the time period when students 

were writing the third essay as: 

a last ditch effort to complete their 

graduating exhibitions. Although the third 

essay would have been awesome to put in an 

exhibition, most kids were trying to take the 

easy way out (which was to revise 

something they already had rather than 

create something new). When push came to 

shove—finish exhibition and go to high 

school or finish the essay—high school won 

out. 

Nonetheless, the possibility of gender 

differences in the ways students respond to the use of 

rubrics needs further investigation. 

It is conceivable that the different results for 

each essay could also be explained in part by the fact 

that students were asked to write different kinds of 

essays, and different kinds of writing require 



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
different kinds of skills. Autobiographical essays, for 

instance, may be easier for students to write and to 

revise according to a rubric than persuasive essays or 

historical fiction in part because students are more 

practiced at telling their own stories. In addition, 

historical fiction and especially persuasive essays 

require a writer to decenter, or argue her point from a 

perspective other than her own. Although many 

junior high students can be expected to have the 

cognitive maturity needed to decenter, Moffett (1983) 

notes that writing from multiple points of view is a 

difficult skill that develops over a lifetime. It is 

possible that students' preferences for their own 

perspectives made the autobiographical essays easier 

to write. If that was the case, it is also likely that they 

found the autobiographical essay rubrics easier to 

understand and to use, hence the positive effect of the 

treatment. The implication, not surprisingly, is that 

instructional rubrics scaffold writing within students' 

zones of proximal development and no further. Like 

all instructional materials, rubrics should be designed 

with regard to students' cognitive development and 

skill level, aiming just beyond what students are able 

to do without assistance. 

The relationship between gender and writing 

may come into play as well. For example, another 

study (Goodrich Andrade & Delamater, in 

preparation) also found that girls tended to earn lower 

scores on historical fiction essays than boys. It has 

been suggested (M. Donahue, personal 

communication, February 16, 2000) that girls have 

more difficulty writing historical fiction because 

most textbooks provide little information about the 

lives of women. Future studies of the effects of 

rubrics should be careful to assign writing 

assignments that give male and female students equal 

opportunities to succeed. 

Conclusion 

Taken together, the analyses of the 

questionnaires and the essay scores indicate that 

simply handing out and explaining instructional 

rubrics can increase students' knowledge of the 

criteria for writing as communicated by the rubric, 

but that translating that knowledge into actual writing 

is more demanding. Although instructional rubrics 

show promise even in a minimalist intervention like 

the one applied in this study, positive effects on 

writing are not a given. The literature on teaching and 

assessing student work, as well as my own teaching 

experience, indicate the need for sustained attention 

to the process of writing, with the provision of 

instructional rubrics playing a key part—but not the 

only part—in providing helpful feedback to students. 

For example, I have found it useful to involve 

students in the design of rubrics, based on their own 

critiques of effective and ineffective sample work, 

but controlled studies of this approach do not exist. 

Research is needed on the most effective role for 

rubrics in the writing process and on the effect of 

rubrics on the performance of female students if the 

promises and pitfalls of this popular approach are to 

be understood and applied in ways that promote 

learning and development. 

Notes 

This study was conducted while the author 

was a principle investigator at Project Zero, Harvard 

Graduate School of Education. Correspondence 

should be addressed to Heidi Andrade, Ohio 

University, College of Education, 340 McCracken 

Hall, Athens, OH 45701. The author would like to 

thank Norma Jimenez and Beth Delamater for their 

assistance in analyzing the results of this study. 

Thanks also go to the Edna McConnell Clark 

Foundation for its financial support. The opinions 

expressed in this paper are the author's and do not 

necessarily reflect those of the Foundation.  

References 

Bangert-Drowns, R., Kulik, C., Kulik, J., & Morgan, 

 M. (1991). The instructional effect of 

 feedback in test-like events. Review of 

 Educational Research, 61, 213-238. 

Butler, D. & Winne, P. (1995). Feedback and self-

 regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. 

 Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 

 245-281. 

Cooper, C. (1999). What we know about genres, and 

 how it can help us assign and evaluate 

 writing. In C. Cooper and L. Odell (Eds.), 

 Evaluating writing: The role of teachers' 

 knowledge about text, learning and culture. 

 National Council of Teachers of English: 

 Urbana, IL. 

Cooper, C. & Odell, L. (1999). Evaluating writing: 

 The role of teachers' knowledge about text, 

 learning and culture. National Council of 

 Teachers of English: Urbana, IL. 

Gardner, H. (1991). Assessment in context: The 

 alternative to standardized testing. In B. R. 

 Gifford and M. C. O'Connor (Eds.), 

 Changing assessments: Alternative views of 

 aptitude, achievement and instruction. 

 Boston: Kluwer. 

Goodrich Andrade, H. (2000). Using rubrics to 

 promote thinking and learning. Educational 

 Leadership, 57(5), 13-18. 

Goodrich Andrade, H., & Delamater, E. (in 

 preparation). Gender and the role of rubric-

 referenced self-assessment in learning to 

 write. 

Goodrich, H. (1997b). Thinking-centered assessment. 

 In S. Veenema, L. Hetland, & K. Chalfen 

 (Eds.), The Project Zero classroom: New 



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

9 

 

 approaches to thinking and understanding. 

 Cambridge, MA: Project Zero, Harvard 

 Graduate School of Education. 

Goodrich, H. (1997a). Understanding rubrics. 

 Educational Leadership, 54(4), 14-17. 

Hawkins, J., Frederikson, J., Collins, A., Bennet, D., 

 & Collins, E. (1993). Assessment and 

 technology: New ways to assess student 

 learning. Technology and Education, 36(5). 

Jensen, K. (1995). Effective rubric design: Making 

 the most of this powerful assessment tool. 

 Science Teacher, 62(5), 34-37. 

Ketter, J. (1997). Using rubrics and holistic scoring 

 of writing. In Tchudi, S. (Ed.) Alternatives 

 to grading student writing. Urbana, IL: 

 National Council of Teachers of English. 

Luft, J. (1997). Design your own rubric. Science 

 Scope, 20(5), 25-27. 

Moffett, James (1983). Teaching the universe of 

 discourse. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. 

Perkins, D. N., Jay, E., & Tishman, S. (1993). 

 Beyond abilities: A dispositional theory of 

 thinking. The Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 

 39(1), 1-21. 

Popham, W. J. (1997). What's wrong—and what's 

 right—with rubrics. Educational 

 Leadership, 55(2), 72-75. 

Shepard, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a 

 learning culture. Educational Researcher, 

 29(7), 4-14. 

White, E. (1994). Teaching and assessing writing: 

 Recent advances in understanding, 

 evaluating, and improving student 

 performance, 2nd edition. Portland, ME: 

 Calendar Islands Publishers. 

White, E. (2000). Bursting the bubble sheet: How to 

 improve evaluations of teaching. The 

 Chronicle of Higher Education, XLVII(11), 

 B11. 

Wiggins, G. (1989b). Teaching to the (authentic) test. 

 Educational Leadership, 46(7), 41-47. 

Wiggins, G. (1989a). A true test: Toward more 

 authentic and equitable assessment. Phi 

 Delta Kappan, 70(9), 703-713. 

Wolf, D., & Pistone, N. (1991). Taking full measure: 

 Rethinking assessment through the arts. 

 New York: College Board Publications. 

 

 

 

 

 



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 

Appendix A 

 

Essay Prompts and Rubrics 

 

Essay 2: Autobiographical Journey 

Write about a journey you have taken. It could be a long trip, a short ride, a walk, or even a fantasy journey you 

experienced in your mind. Tell your readers a story that lets us enter your real or imaginary journey and understand 

what it means to you. 

 

Instructional Rubric for Essay 2: Autobiographical Journey 

  4 3 2 1 

The purpose of 

the journey 

Tells where you went and why going 

there was interesting or important  

Tells where you went and 

why you went there 

Either where you went or 

why you went there is 
unclear 

Does not tell where you 

went or why you went 
there 

The scene Vividly sets the scene, describing 

important sights, sounds, smells, 

and/or tastes along the way  

Describes the scene in 

detail, but not vividly 

Describes the scene at some 

point (usually the 

beginning) but some scenes 
are not described well  

Does not describe the 

setting of the journey 

The cast of 

characters 

Creates complex characters by 

showing them in action, using 

dialogue, letting the reader overhear 
their inner thoughts, describing their 

appearance, personality, behavior, 

etc. 

Creates characters by 

describing them and using 

dialogue 

Describes characters but 

does not show how they 

speak, behave, feel, etc. 

Does not introduce a cast 

of characters 

The action Tells one or two specific exciting, 
funny, unusual, or sad things that 

happened during the journey and 

why they were important 

Tells one or two specific 
things that happened but it 

isn't clear why they were 

important 

Tells one or two specific 
things but they aren't 

clearly written 

No specific events or 
actions stand out 

Feelings, 

insights, lessons 

learned 

Reveals feelings about and insights 
gained from the trip, and draws a 

general lesson learned from it 

Reveals feelings about and 
insights gained from the 

trip 

Describes a variety of 
feelings and ideas, but 

doesn't have a central 

"vibe," insight or reflection 

Doesn't share any of the 
writer's insights or 

lessons learned 

Organization Story has an interesting beginning, a 
developed middle and satisfying end. 

Correct paragraph format, at least 5 

paragraphs 

Story moves through the 
beginning, middle and end 

in a logical order. Correct 

paragraph format, at least 
5 paragraphs 

The story is usually 
organized but sometimes 

gets off the topic. Some 

problems with paragraphs 
and/or less than 5 

paragraphs 

The story is aimless and 
disorganized. Incorrect 

paragraph and/or less 

than 5 paragraphs 

Conventions Uses first person form, correct 

grammar, mechanics and spelling. 
Uses complex sentences, 

sophisticated vocabulary, etc. 

Generally uses correct 

grammar, mechanics and 
spelling.  

Frequent errors are 

distracting but do not 
interfere with meaning  

Numerous problems with 

fragments, run-ons, 
grammar, spelling, etc. 

make the story hard to 

read 

 

  



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

11 

 

Essay 3, School A: Personal Challenge 
Write a 5 (or more) paragraph essay about a time you faced a challenge. Perhaps this challenge seemed impossible, 

discouraging, or scary. Perhaps you were helped through it by another person, or maybe you faced it on your own. 

Tell about this incident in detail, including who was involved, what the people and surroundings looked like, exactly 

what happened, your thoughts about the alternatives or ways you could have handled the challenge, and the final 

outcome. Try to make your readers understand why this particular event is memorable. 

 

Instructional Rubric for Essay 3, School A: Personal Challenge 

Criteria 4 3 2 1 

Ideas and 

Content 

My paper tells of a difficult, 
discouraging or scary challenge; 

shows growth or change in the 

main character and how s/he 
coped; uses relevant and rich 

details and examples 

My paper tells of a 
challenge but it isn't made 

to sound very gripping; 

growth of the main 
character may be hard to 

see; uses relevant details 

and examples 

My paper tells of a challenge 
but it may not always be in 

focus; it may get off topic; it's 

not clear how the character 
grows; some details or 

examples may not matter or 

don't go together 

The challenge is murky; 
it is hard to tell what the 

topic is; it seems a little 

like random thoughts on 
paper 

Organization My paper has a lead that 
establishes the challenge, a 

developed middle that builds 

tension, and a satisfying ending 
that resolves the problem, all in 

an order that makes sense, flows, 

and hangs together 

I have a beginning, middle 
and end in a logical order 

but without flair. My paper 

takes the reader on a walk 
but on a sidewalk, not a 

high wire 

My organization is rough but 
workable; my writing may drag 

its feet then race ahead; my 

ending may stop suddenly or 
drag on too long 

My writing is aimless 
and disorganized; there is 

little sense of a beginning 

or ending; it is probably 
confusing to a reader 

Voice My writing has personality & 
sounds like a real person wrote it; 

it shows how I think and feel & 

sounds like it was written to be 
read 

My writing voice is 
engaging but may come and 

go, fading in and out 

My writing is bland or 
mechanical, sounds like I have 

not found my own way to say 

things 

There are no hints of the 
real me in my writing; it 

may sound like I don't 

like what I have written 

Word choice The words I use are striking but 

natural, e.g., I use "terrified" 

instead of "scared," or "gut" 
instead of "stomach"; I use 

powerful verbs 

My paper has some fine 

word choices, but is often 

routine.  

My word choice is uninspired, 

colorless, and dull or sounds 

like I am trying too hard to 
impress; some words may be 

used incorrectly 

The same words are 

repeated over and over 

and over and over; some 
words may be 

bewildering and 

confusing to a reader 

Sentence 

Fluency 

My sentences are clear; they 
begin in different ways; some are 

longer than others; no fragments; 

my paper is a delight to read out 
loud 

My sentences are well 
constructed; some minor 

errors in sentence structure; 

my paper marches along but 
doesn't dance  

My sentences are often 
awkward or mechanical; little 

variety in length; may have 

many sentences that begin with 
the same word  

My paper is tough to read 
because of incomplete 

sentences, run-ons, and 

awkward phrasings 

Conventions I use the correct paragraph form, 

grammar, capitals, spelling, and 
punctuation 

I made some errors, mostly 

by taking risks and using 
interesting words or 

sentences 

My spelling is correct on 

common words; several errors 
in conventions are distracting  

Many errors in paragraph 

form, grammar, caps, 
spelling and punctuation 

make my paper hard to 

read 

 

  



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
Essay 3, School B: Historical Fiction 
Please write a letter from or journal entry of a 14 year-old American living in some year between 1491 and 1979. 

Take on the persona of your fictional character and write about a day in her or his life. Your 5 (or more) paragraph 

entry should tell what year it is and use historically accurate phrases and language to describe your living situation, 

clothing, hygiene, education, roles in family and community, work, food, etc. Also refer to relevant political, social, 

and/or religious events. 

 

Instructional Rubric for Essay 3, School B: Historical Fiction 

Criteria 4 3 2 1 

Ideas and 

Content 

My paper brings the time and 

place in which my character 

lived alive; vividly describes 

her/his experiences and values; 

uses only historically accurate 

language and events 

My paper tells the time and 

place my character lived; 

describes a day in her/his 

life; most or all language 

and events are historically 

accurate 

The time & place my character 

lived is relatively clear, but 

his/her experiences are more like 

a list than a letter or diary entry; 

some language or events may be 

historically inaccurate 

The setting is murky; the 

character's language and 

experiences are often 

historically inaccurate; the 

paper may stray off topic or 

just ramble 

Organization My letter/diary has a strong 
lead, a developed middle, and 

a satisfying ending, all in an 

order that makes sense, flows, 
and hangs together 

I have a beginning, middle 
and end in a logical order 

but without flair.  

My organization is rough but 
workable; my writing may drag 

its feet then race ahead; my 

ending may stop suddenly or 
drag on too long 

My writing is aimless and 
disorganized; there is little 

sense of a beginning or 

ending; it is probably 
confusing to a reader 

Voice My writing sounds like a real 

person wrote it; it has 

personality; shows how I think 
and feel; sounds like it was 

written to be read 

My writing voice is 

engaging but may come 

and go, fading in and out 

My writing is bland or 

mechanical, sounds like I have 

not found my own way to say 
things 

There are no hints of a real 

person in my writing; it may 

sound like I don't like what I 
have written 

Word choice The words I use are striking 

but natural, e.g., I use 
"terrified" instead of "scared," 

or "gut" instead of "stomach"; 

I use powerful verbs 

My paper has some fine 

word choices, but is often 
routine. 

My word choice is uninspired, 

colorless, and dull or sounds like 
I am trying too hard to impress; 

some words may be used 

incorrectly 

The same words are 

repeated over and over and 
over and over; some words 

may be bewildering and 

confusing to a reader 

Sentence 

Fluency 

My sentences are clear; they 
begin in different ways; some 

are longer than others; no 

fragments; my paper is a 
delight to read out loud 

My sentences are well 
constructed; some minor 

errors in sentence structure; 

my paper marches along 
but doesn't dance 

My sentences are often awkward 
or mechanical; little variety in 

length; may have many 

sentences that begin with the 
same word 

My paper is tough to read 
because of incomplete 

sentences, run-ons, and 

awkward phrasings 

Conventions I use the correct paragraph 

form, grammar, capitals, 

spelling, and punctuation 

I made some errors, mostly 

by taking risks and using 

interesting words or 
sentences 

My spelling is correct on 

common words; several errors in 

conventions are distracting 

Many errors in paragraph 

form, grammar, caps, 

spelling and punctuation 
make my paper hard to read 

 

  



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

13 

 

Appendix B 

 

Scoring Rubrics 

 

Scoring Rubric for Persuasive Essay (adaptations to instructional rubric in bold) 

Criteria 4 3 2 1 

Makes a claim Makes a claim and explains why 

it is controversial. 

Makes a claim but 

doesn't explain why it 

is controversial. 

A claim is made but it is 

buried, confused, or unclear. 

Does not make a claim. 

Gives reasons 
in support of 

the claim 

Gives clear and accurate reasons 
in support of the claim. e.g., pro: 

leadership, informed voters, 

productive workers, learning 

from history, self-esteem, 

decision-making and other tht. 

skills, jobs / $, economy, 

delinquency / risk; 

con: freedom of choice, extra-

curricular pursuits self-

education, waste of $, bad 

students ruin it for others, jobs 

/ $, having kids of one's own. 

Gives reasons in 
support of the claim, 

but overlooks 

important reasons. 

Gives one or two weak 
reasons which don't support 

the claim well, and / or 

irrelevant reasons and / or 

confused reasoning. 

Does not give reasons in 
support of the claim. 

Considers 

reasons against 

the claim 

Thoroughly discusses reasons 

against the claim and explains 

why the claim is valid anyway. 

Reasons, as listed above, should 

come from whichever side was 

not taken as the claim. 

Discusses reasons 

against the claim, but 

leaves out important 
reasons, andor doesn't 

explain why the claim 

still stands. 

Acknowledges that there are 

reasons against the claim but 

doesn't explain them. 

Does not give reasons against 

the claim. 

Relates the 
claim to 

democracy 

Discusses how issues related to 
democracy can be used both in 

support of and against the claim. 

Discusses how issues 
related to democracy 

can be used to support 

the claim. 

Says that democracy is 
relevant but does not clearly 

explain how or why. 

Does not mention democracy. 

Might mention freedom or 

choice, but without 

connecting beyond self to 

country or world. 

Organization Writing is well organized, has a 

compelling opening, an 

informative body, and satisfying 
conclusion. Has appropriate 

paragraph format. 

Writing shows 

organization through a 

clear beginning, middle 
and end. Generally uses 

appropriate paragraph 

format. 

Writing is usually organized 

but sometimes gets off topic. 

Has several errors in 
paragraph format, and / or 

middle is disorganized. 

Writing is aimless and 

disorganized. 

Conventions Uses correct grammar, mechanics 

and spelling. 

Generally uses correct 

grammar. Some minor 

errors do not distract or 

confuse the reader. 

Shows some control of 

conventions but frequent 

errors are distracting or 

confusing to the reader. 

Writing shows little control of 

conventions. Serious and 

numerous problems distract 

and confuse the reader. 

Words and 

Sentences 
Words are striking but natural, 

varied, and vivid. Sentences are 

clear, defined, fluent, and 

diverse. May use sophisticated 

vocabulary and analogies. 

Fine but routine word 

choice. Well-

constructed but 

somewhat flat 

sentences. Some 

minor errors. May 

attempt analogies. 

Word choice is dull, 

uninspired, or overly self-

conscious. Some words may 

be used incorrectly. 

Sentences are redundant, 

possibly awkward or 

mechanical. No analogies or 

strange ones! 

Minimal variety in 

vocabulary, and some words 

may be bewildering or 

confusing to the reader. 

Sentences are poorly crafted 

and difficult to read, e.g. run-

ons, fragments, awkward 

phrasing. No analogies. 

 

  



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
Scoring Rubric for Autobiographical Journey Essay 

  
4 

The Wow factor 
3 

2 

An attempt 
1 

The purpose of the 

journey (Can I say 

where they went & 
why?) 

Tells where you went and 

why going there was 

interesting or important to 
you 

Tells where you went 

and why you went there 

Either where you went or why you 

went there is unclear 

Does not tell where you 

went or why you went 

there 

The scene (Do I 

have a picture?) 

Vividly sets the scene, 

describing important sights, 

sounds, smells, and/or tastes 
along the way 

Describes the central 

scene(s) in detail, but 

not vividly 

Describes the scene at some point 

but some central scenes are not 

described well or only unimportant 
details are given 

Does not describe the 

setting of the journey 

The cast of 

characters 
 
 

        1 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

        2 

Creates complex characters 

by showing them in action, 

describing their appearance, 
personality or behavior, 

 

 
 

 

using dialogue, letting reader 
"overhear" their inner 

thoughts. 

Creates central 

characters by describing 

who they are, what they 
look like, gestures, 

expressions, 

 
 

 

 
and using relevant 

dialogue 

Tells who is in the story by giving 

names, ages, or older/younger 

references, but does not show how 
characters behave, feel, or only 

describes one of several characters 

 
or uses little or only irrelevant 

dialogue 

Only vaguely refers to 

characters or leaves 

significant characters 
out, 

 

 
 

 

 
 

does not use dialogue 

The action Tells one or two specific 

exciting, funny, unusual, or 

sad things that happened 

during the journey and why 

they were important 

Tells in detail one or 

two specific things that 

happened but it isn't 

clear why they were 

important 

Tells one or two specific things but 

without enough detail to let a 

reader understand what's going on 

No specific events or 

actions stand out 

Feelings, insights, 

lessons learned 

Reveals feelings about and 
insights gained from the trip. 

A general lesson learned 

draws on a thread that runs 
through the essay. 

Reveals feelings about 
and insights gained 

from the trip, but 

insights may be tacked 
on at the end. 

Describes feelings and ideas, but 
doesn't have a central insight or 

reflection, or it isn't well connected 

to the story 

Doesn't share the writer's 
feelings, insights or 

lessons learned 

Organization 
 
 

        1 

 
 

 

 
 

 

        2 

Story has an interesting 

beginning, a developed 
middle that builds tension, 

and satisfying end. 

 
Correct paragraph format, at 

least 5 paragraphs 

Story moves through 

the beginning, middle 
and end in a logical 

order.  

 
 

 

Generally correct 
format, at least 5 

paragraphs 

Organization is rough but 

workable. Story may get off topic. 
 

 

 
 

 

Some problems with paragraphs 
and/or less than 5 paragraphs 

The story is aimless or 

disorganized, lacks 
direction. 

 

 
 

 

 
Incorrect paragraph 

(maybe only 1) and/or 

less than 5 paragraphs 

Conventions Uses first person form, 
correct grammar, mechanics 

and spelling. Uses complex 

sentences, sophisticated 
vocabulary, etc. 

Generally uses correct 
grammar, mechanics 

and spelling. 

Frequent errors are distracting but 
do not interfere with meaning (3 or 

so errors per paragraph) 

Numerous problems 
with fragments, run-ons, 

grammar, spelling, etc. 

make the story hard to 
read 

 

 

  



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

15 

 

Scoring Rubric for the Historical Fiction Essay 

Criteria 4 3 2 1 

Ideas and Content My paper brings the time 

and place in which my 
character lived alive; vividly 

describes her/his experiences 

and values; refers to 
historically accurate events. 

My paper tells the time 

and place my character 
lived; describes a day in 

her/his life; most or all 

events are historically 
accurate. 

The time & place my 

character lived is relatively 
clear, but his/her experiences 

are more like a list than a 

letter or diary entry; some 
events may be historically 

inaccurate. 

The setting is murky; the 

character's experiences 
are often historically 

inaccurate; the paper may 

stray off topic or just 
ramble. 

Organization [Stand 

back and think with 
holistic perspective] 

[Imagine paragraph 

breaks] 

My letter/diary has a strong 

lead, a developed middle, 
and a satisfying ending, all 

in an order that makes sense, 

flows, and hangs together. 

I have a beginning, 

middle and end in order; 
some minor organization 

problems such as a 

superfluous or out-of-

place sentence. 

My organization is rough but 

workable; my writing may 
drag its feet then race ahead; 

my ending may stop suddenly 

or drag on too long. 

My writing is aimless and 

disorganized; there is little 
sense of a beginning or 

ending; it is probably 

confusing to a reader. 

Voice (a) 
 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

Voice (b) 

I use only historically 

accurate language, 
consistently using terms, 

phrases and slang from the 

period.  
 

My writing sounds like a 

real person wrote it. 

My language is mostly 

historically accurate but 
without distinction. 

 

 
 

 

My writing voice is 
engaging but may fade in 

and out. 

I use basic English, avoiding 

90's slang but not using 
language of the period.  

 

 
 

 

My writing is bland or 
mechanical in many places. 

I make no discernable 

attempt to use historically 
accurate language. 

 

 
 

 

There are no hints of a 
real person in my writing; 

it may sound like I don't 

like what I have written. 

Word choice The words I use are striking 

but natural, e.g., I use 

"terrified" instead of 

"scared," or "gut" instead of 
"stomach"; I use powerful 

verbs. 

My paper has some fine 

word choices and 

generally good language; 

some parts may be 
routine. 

My word choice is uninspired, 

colorless, and dull or sounds 

like I am trying too hard to 

impress; some words may be 
used incorrectly. 

The same words are 

repeated over and over 

and over and over; some 

words may be bewildering 
and confusing to a reader. 

Sentence Fluency My sentences are clear; they 

begin in different ways; 
some are longer than others; 

no fragments; my paper is a 

delight to read out loud. 

My sentences are well 

constructed; some minor 
errors in sentence 

structure; my essay 

marches along but doesn't 
dance. 

My sentences are often 

awkward or mechanical; little 
variety in length; may have 

many sentences that begin 

with the same word.  

My paper is tough to read 

because almost all of my 
sentences are incomplete, 

run-ons, and/or awkward. 

Conventions I use the correct paragraph 

form, grammar, capitals, 

spelling, and punctuation. 

I made some errors, 

perhaps by taking risks 

and using interesting 

words or sentences. 

My spelling is correct on 

common words; several errors 

in conventions are distracting. 

Many errors in paragraph 

form, grammar, caps, 

spelling, punctuation 

make my paper hard to 

read. 

 

 

  



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
Scoring Rubric for the Challenge Essay 

Criteria 4 3 2 1 

Ideas and 

Content 

My paper tells of a difficult, 
discouraging or scary 

challenge; shows growth or 

change in the main character 
and how s/he coped; uses 

relevant and rich details and 

examples 

My paper tells of a challenge but 
it isn't made to sound very 

gripping; growth of the main 

character may be hard to see; 
uses relevant details and 

examples 

My paper tells of a challenge 
but it may not always be in 

focus; it may get off topic; it's 

not clear how the character 
grows; some details or 

examples may not matter or 

don't go together 

The challenge is murky; 
it is hard to tell what the 

topic is; it seems a little 

like random thoughts on 
paper 

Organization My paper has a lead that 
establishes the challenge, a 

developed middle that builds 

tension, and a satisfying ending 

that resolves the problem, all in 

an order that makes sense, 

flows, and hangs together 

I have a beginning, middle and 
end in order; may have minor 

organizational problems such as 

an out-of-place sentence or two. 

My paper takes the reader on a 

walk but on a sidewalk, not a 

high wire. 

My organization is rough but 
workable; my writing may 

drag its feet then race ahead; 

my ending may stop suddenly 

or drag on too long. [You may 

find yourself rearranging 

paragraphs.] 

My writing is aimless 
and disorganized; there 

is little sense of a 

beginning or ending; it 

is probably confusing to 

a reader 

Voice My writing sounds like a real 
person wrote it; it has 

personality; shows how I think 

and feel; sounds like it was 
written to be read 

My writing voice is engaging but 
may come and go, fading in and 

out 

My writing is bland or 
mechanical, sounds like I 

have not found my own way 

to say things 

There are no hints of the 
real me in my writing; it 

may sound like I don't 

like what I have written 

Word choice The words I use are striking but 

natural, e.g., I use "terrified" 

instead of "scared;" I use 
powerful verbs 

My paper has some fine word 

choices [You can count several], 

but is often routine.  

My word choice is plain or 

colorless or sounds like I am 

trying too hard to impress; 
some words may be used 

incorrectly 

The same words are 

repeated over and over 

and over and over; some 
words may be 

bewildering and 

confusing to a reader 

Sentence 

Fluency 

My sentences are clear; they 
begin in different ways; some 

are longer than others; no 

fragments; my paper is a delight 
to read out loud 

My sentences are well 
constructed; some minor errors 

in sentence structure; my paper 

marches along but doesn't dance  

My sentences are often 
awkward or mechanical; little 

variety in length; may have 

many sentences that begin 
with the same word  

My paper is tough to 
read because of 

incomplete sentences, 

run-ons, and awkward 
phrasings 

Conventions I use the correct paragraph 

form, grammar, capitals, 

spelling, and punctuation 

I made some errors, mostly by 

taking risks and using interesting 

words or sentences 

My spelling is correct on 

common words; several errors 

in conventions are distracting  

Many errors in 

paragraph form, 

grammar, caps, spelling, 
punctuation make my 

paper hard to read 

 

 

  



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

17 

 

Appendix C 

 

Sample Essays 

 

Identification number Experimental Condition Score on Rubric 

1 Treatment 3.22 

2 Treatment 3.00 

3 Treatment 4 (teacher score only) 

4 Control 1.56 

5 Control 1.44 

 

 

Autobiographical Journey Essays Written by Eighth Grade Students in this Study 
Essay 1: "Vegas Vacation" 

My dad had been planning on taking my brother and I to Las Vegas for weeks. The reason it was so important was 

because my brother and I have never been out of the state. We were going to leave July 10, a Monday, and get back 

July 14, a Thursday. We left at 3:00 AM so that we would beat the heat. We would get there somewhere around 3:00 

AM. The day before we left we picked up a rental car, so we would have more room to move around. 

As we were driving through California we saw many important things. We saw landmarks which my dad said we 

would see. These landmarks represented the distance to our next destination. The closer we got the more the sun 

came out. It looked beautiful as we were going through all the mountains in California. In Barstow we drove by a 

slaughter house and it smelled awful for about 30 minutes, then it went away. I drank bottled water and ate chips, 

that were some of the things we brought on the trip; so we would have something to eat and drink on the long trip. 

My dad, my brother and I were the ones who went to Vegas. My brother was getting impatient about something and 

he started cusing. Then my dad said "Shut up or I'll turn around and drive straight home." My brother and I were in 

the backseat telling each other jokes and listening to music. My brother is short, skinny, and has brown hair. My dad 

is tall, strong, and has brown hair too. 

The second day we were there we went to an amusement park called Grand Slam Canyon. The park had an indoor 

roller coaster that went all throughout the park. I didn't go on it because the line was too long, and because I didn't 

want to wait in line all day. They also have lots of Midway games, and also a big 50 ft. high water slide. I went on 

the waterslide 3 times. It goes down pretty fast and I also got wet at the end of the slide. The next day we went to a 

waterpark called "Wet N' Wild." It was very hot 120 degrees, so the water was very refreshing on our bodies. The 

park had big pools with water shooting all around. You could just sit around, or frolic in the refreshing water. The 

best part of the park was a long river like thing that went all the way around the park. The current would take you 

about 5 miles an hour. You could sit on a big doughnut shaped innertube and float all the way around the park. I 

went on a lot of different slides. At first I was nervous, but once I started going it was very fun. We took a lot of 

pictures at these two places, and cut a lot of other places. We drove through Glitter Guleh and saw all of the 

different casinos and lights. We visited a lot of other casinos and hotels. We went inside the MGM Grand, Excaliber, 

Treasure Island, and many more. 

My feelings about this experience is very positive. I had the most fun I ever had in my life. It wasn't the only time I 

went, I also went the next summer. I found out how crazy about money people can get when there is a lot of it 

around. I also realized that I shouldn't take San Diego's weather for granted. I learned that good weather is more 

important than having a lot of fun. Sometimes fun is more important, but most of the time the weather is much more 

important. 

 

Essay 2: My Trip to the Mall 

It all started on a Sunday afternoon, when my friend Mike and I were at my house watching T.V and we were so 

bored because all there was to watch was Barney. We decided to go rollerblading at the mall because we thought it 

could have been exciting. It was fantastic at the mall! We had the greatest time there, we saw all kinds of different 

clothing and tasted all kinds of exotic foods. We arrived at this shop were they sold all kinds of weird things. The 

shop was small, blue, green, and with weird writing on the walls, it was really dark inside so it was hard to see. We 

smelled all sorts of things in the shop like: Black Beauty, Strawberry, and Cherry. 



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
A mysterious lady came out of the back room, she was tall, skinny, with dark hair, and freckles. When she spoke to 

us, she sounded like if she was chocking on something. I saw that she was limping so I took a good look at her leg it 

looked like a pirate had chopped it off and glued on a wooden one. Her personality wasn't at all good, I mean she 

said,"Get the hell out of here." So of course we left the old lady and her weird old shop. 

After we had left we went to the movies but we had ran out of money so at the time Mike and I thought the best 

thing to do was to sneak in; which was unusual for us because we like to play by the rules besides it was very 

important to us to brake the rules because we wanted to now how it felt like. So eventually we snuck in and 

eventually we got caught! For some reason I was expecting to happen, when it did it felt like a dark cloud had come 

over us and God himself was going to pass judgment on us! Good thing that was all in my head because in reality 

the cops let us of in a warning. So of course right after that we left the mall and our journey had come to an end. 

I guess when I got home I felt bad for what I had done. I learned a valuable lesson that day which was, "Never do 

anything, that you now you're going to get in trouble for and regrete." 

 

Essay 3: Untitled 

In my journey I was going to Mexico to visit my family. This trip was very important to me because I learned how 

to get along with-out my parents. Also, I learned how to do my best because two people were depending on me. In 

this trip I flew from Tijuana B.C to Mazatlan, Mexico with my sister Adriana. This interesting trip occurred when I 

was thirteen years old. 

The airplane I went on was Aero Mexico. This airplane had rows of three and two seats. In the airplane there were 

lots of people. We were sitting in the front so that's why I saw lots of people. The airplane at first smelled like 

perfume but later, it smelled like chicken. The airplane also was very cold at first but, as soon as I heard we were 

getting near Mazatlan I was very nervous. I heard some people laughing, talking, a man snoring hard. It was 

annoying, I decided to look out the window. The only thing I saw was a lot of white, blue, puffy clouds. I think the 

best thing I had seen so far that day was the beautiful and interesting sky. When we got off the airplane we were at 

the Mazatlan, Mexico Airport. Mazatlan is a very hot place. You feel like if there's not any air. 

There in the big airport I saw my tio Juan and my cousin Stephanie "Fanny". My tio was chubby and in my opinion 

ugly. My cousin was wearing a flowered dress and some little sandals. She was skinny and she was an adorable cute 

kid. Then, as we were out side I saw this old tall man. He had white hair and was wearing a white sombrero. It was 

my abuelo. After hugging my abuelo we got on his truck. Whey we got to Tepic, Mayarit, Mexico I saw this old 

small woman. It was my abuela. She had a dress and grey hair. She told me that she loved me. 

An important and unforgtable moment was when my abuelo told my fourteen year old cousin to leave the house 

because we were flirting with my abuelo's worker. When my tio told him he got very mad. I had never seen him that 

mad in my life. In that moment I felt very sad because my cousin got in a lot of trouble. My abuelo didn't say 

anything but I knew he was very mad. This is an important event because I learned and felt something that really 

hurt. 

The lesson I learned was not to talk to boys because my relationship with my abuelos is not the same as with my 

parents. I also learned that flirting with that guy was not right. Looking back on journey, I tought the moments I 

spent with my family were sad, funny, and fun. I feel that my trip to Mexico without my parents was a good 

experience for me to see the world and other things as well. 

 

Essay 4: COUNTRYSIDE—My Journey to up state New York 

On October 7, 1996 I left with my aunt, uncle, and three cusins. My mom (Clara) was very sad that was leaving then 

for at least 4 yrs. My brother (Darrold) sad too. When I was leaving the house my mom and brother cried. My 

brother cried the most. I too cried a little but only for a while. Before I left my moms rm. She told, "listen to your 

aunt, don't give her a hard and help her up when she needs help". I told her "yes mom". My dad (Greg) droped me 

off at the Navy Log where my aunt and uncle were staying at for the night. We left the Navy Log at October 8, 

1996. The ride to New York was boring because we hardly had anything to do. I had some drawing papers, crayons, 

markers, and writing papers. That's all I had to do. The only stops we made were to restraunts, gasoline stations, 

stores, and hotels. Oh I forgot to say that we traveld to New York by car. One of the worse places I would never 

want to pass by was the desert. It was so hot even rolling down the window didn't help. The trip to New York took 

us at least one week. When we got there, we stay with my grand parents place. My grant parents welcomed us and 

my aunt, an and two other male cusins too. There were more boys than girls I had to live with. Five boys and one 

girl me. Well that's my journey to New York. Hope you injoyed it too. 

 

Essay 5: My journey to Disneyland 



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

19 

 

At 8:30 a.m. my mom had woken me up. My mom told me to wake up and take a shower. So I did. At 9:39 I was 

done. I was putting close on and when I was done my mom told me and everyone else to get a jaket because we are 

going somewhere. My mom also had told me to stop horse playing with everyone. When everyone got ready it was 

9:01. My mom told me to put my stuff in the trunk of the car. So I put all my stuff in the trunk and so did everyone 

else. When my step dad put the ice chest in the trunk. I grabbed a soda out from it. 

Then we all went off together. My sister, my mom, my step dad, brothers, and sister all went off together. My sister 

and my step brother and I sat in the back messing around. My sister started to play with my step brother my mom 

and step dad, brother, and sister sat in the front were they all talked to each other. 

We stopped at my step dads work where we all got drinks and went to the restroom. We stayed there talking for 30 

min. We all got back in the car and took off to Disneyland. 

Everyone was falling asleep. I was awake talking to my mom that where we were going. I just stopped asking my 

mom because I was falling asleep. 

I woke up at Disneyland parking lote. We all got out and got something to drink then we left to go on rides. 

 

 

  



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 

Appendix D 

 

Data Interpretations 

 

Interpretation of the final regression model for the persuasive essay (Essay 1) 

Controlling for grades, standardized test scores, teacher, and school, there is no statistically significant effect of 

treatment on essay 1 scores. This model accounts for 24.49% of the variation in essay 1 scores. 

No interactions were statistically significant, suggesting that the effects of treatment did not differ for School A and 

School B, nor for females and males. 

ESL, special education, gender, and ethnicity were dropped from the final model because they were not statistically 

significant through the model building process nor were any interactions between them and the question predictor or 

other control variables. This model is the most parsimonious model that accounts for significant covariates. 

 

Power calculation 

For a multiple linear regression model which already includes 4 covariates (control variables) with a squared 

multiple correlation R
2
 of 0.245 (the R

2
 obtained from a model including the four control variables only), a sample 

size of 106 will have 31% power to detect at = 0.100 an increase in R
2
 of 0.010 due to including 1 additional 

variable. 

 

Interpretation of the final regression model for the autobiographical journey essay (Essay 2) 

Controlling for grades, standardized test scores, gender, and the interaction between grades and gender, there is a 

statistically significant effect of treatment on essay 2 scores. Controlling for the aforementioned variables, treatment 

students are predicted to score, on average, .49 points higher on essay 2 than control students. Since there were no 

interactions present between treatment and the control variables, this means that the effects of the treatment did not 

differ by gender, test scores, or grades. However, there was an interaction between grades and gender, suggesting 

that the effect of grades on essay 2 scores differed by gender. In this case, the main effect indicates that for males, 

there is no effect of grades on essay 2 scores, controlling for experimental condition and standardized test scores. 

However, for females, there is a positive effect of grades on essay 2 scores, controlling for experimental condition 

and standardized tests ( grade = 0.019537, t-statistic = 1.985, p < .0560). This model accounts for 39.92% of the 

variation in essay 2 scores. 

Teacher, school, ESL, special education, and ethnicity were dropped from the final model because they were not 

consistently statistically significant through the model building process, nor were any interactions between them and 

the question predictor or other control variables. This final model is the most parsimonious model that accounts for 

significant covariates. 

 

Power calculation 

For a multiple linear regression model which already includes 4 covariates with a squared multiple correlation R2 of 

0.176, a sample size of 37 will have 95% power to detect at = 0.100 an increase in R2 of 0.223 due to including 1 

additional variable. 

 

Interpretation of the final regression model for the historical fiction and personal challenge essay (Essay 3) 

The statistically significant interaction between treatment and gender means that the effect of treatment differs for 

females and males, controlling for grades, standardized test scores, school, and ethnicity. Since the main effect of 

treatment is not statistically significant, this means that for males (males are coded as gender = 0) there are no 

statistically significant differences in essay 3 scores between males who were in the treatment group and those in the 

control group ( treatment = .119110, t-statistic = .72, p = .4726), controlling for the aforementioned variables. For 

females, there was a statistically significant difference in predicted essay 3 scores between females in the treatment 

and control groups ( female= -0.308641, t-statistic=-1.736, p<.0845). The negative parameter estimate indicates that, 

on average, females in the control group are predicted to have essay 3 scores that are .31 points higher than females 

in the treatment group, controlling for grades, standardized test scores, school and ethnicity. Moreover, the main 

effect of gender in the above model is statistically significant ( gender = -.507182, t-statistic = 2.218, p < .0280) 

which indicates that females in the control group are predicted to have scores on essay 3 that are .51 points higher 

than males in the control group, on average, controlling for grades, standardized test scores, and ethnicity. However, 

there was no statistically significant difference on essay 3 scores between males and females in the treatment group (



The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write 

21 

 

treatment = .079431, t-statistic = .784, p < .434), controlling for grades, standardized test scores, and ethnicity. This 

model accounts for 19.09% of the variation in essay 3 scores. 

There was no interaction between school and treatment suggesting that the effects of treatment did not differ for 

School A and School B. 

Teacher, ESL, and special education were dropped from the final model because they were not consistently 

statistically significant through the model building process nor were any interactions between them and the question 

predictor or other control variables. This final model is the most parsimonious model that accounts for significant 

covariates. 

 

Power calculation 

For a multiple linear regression model which already includes 6 covariates with a squared multiple correlation R2 of 

0.188, a sample size of 160 will have 39% power to detect at = 0.100 an increase in R2 of 0.010 due to including 1 

additional variable. 

 

  



Current Issues in Education Vol. 4 No. 4 
 
2001 Article Citation  
Goodrich Andrade, H. (2001, April 17). The effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write. Current Issues in 

 Education [On-line], 4 (4). Available: http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume4/number4/. 

 

Author Notes  
Heidi Goodrich Andrade 

Ohio University 

Athens, OH 

andradeh@ohio.edu 

 

Heidi Goodrich Andrade is an Assistant Professor at the College of Education, Ohio University. She took a position 

at OU after eleven years at Harvard University, where she received her doctorate and conducted research at Project 

Zero. Her teaching focuses on educational psychology and student assessment. Through her research she 

investigates the development of high-level thinking, with an emphasis on the relationships between thinking, 

learning and classroom assessment. She has worked with educators and businesses nationally and internationally on 

the design of thinking-centered instruction and assessments for a variety of contexts, including classrooms, after 

school programs, television shows and CD-ROMs. She has written numerous articles, including an award-winning 

article on rubrics (Goodrich, 1997), and is co-author of two books, Teaching through Projects: Creating Effective 

Learning Environments (Goodrich, Hatch, Wiatrowski & Unger, 1995) and Thinking Connections: Learning to 

Think and Thinking to Learn (Perkins, Goodrich, Tishman & Mirman Owen, 1994).  

 

 

Note from the 2015 Executive Editor, Constantin Schreiber  
June 11, 2015. This article was first published at the original Current Issues in Education website, located at 

http://cie.asu.edu/articles/index.html. In 2009, CIE changed online platforms to deliver the journal at 

http://cie.asu.edu. The original CIE website was from then on only used as an archival repository for published 

articles prior to Volume 12. After the new CIE website moved to a different server in 2014, the original website and 

original article URLs could not be accessed anymore. Therefore, this article had to be repurposed into the published 

format you are viewing now.  

All content from the original publication has been preserved. No content edits occurred. Spelling, grammar, 

and mechanical errors that may be found were present in the original publication. The CIE logo and publisher 

information in use at the time of the article’s original publication is unaltered. Please direct questions about this 

article’s repurposing to cie@asu.edu.  

 

 

2015 Article Citation  
Andrade, H. G. (2001). The effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write. Current Issues in Education, 4(4). 

 Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1630 

 

 

 

file:///D:/CIE/Volumes%20&%20Issues/cie-archive/2001,%20Vol%204,%20%231-7/number4/index.html
mailto:andradeh@ohio.edu
http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1630