Factor 2: "Show Criteria and Models in Advance". McTigue begins here by showing the example of the high school language arts teacher who distributes a rubric for her research unit ahead of the actual due dates. This is a valid practice because "well-developed rubrics communicate the important dimensions...in a product or performance and guide educators in evaluating student work" (13). Furthermore, rubrics also benefit students by giving them clear expectations ahead of time of the criteria being assessed on the assignment. However, McTigue also says that rubrics alone aren't enough: "Learners are more likely to understand feedback and evaluations when teachers show several examples that display both excellent and weak work" (13-14). He goes on to say that some teachers fear this type of instruction, saying that students will now merely copy the good assignment without putting much thought into it. Teachers can alleviate this problem by providing several examples of both good and bad work. They are able to take note of the differences and make concrete examples of what was once just abstract language in the rubric.

I picked this factor because I do this in my classroom and I find it incredibly helpful and have been able to truly see a difference in the students' writing.
This connects to Payne's concept of modern assessment in several ways, the most prevalent being the "value beyond the assessment itself". This is crucial because using this rubric will allow the student to go beyond just this "paper"...using the rubric enables kids to take ownership of the assignment and not worry about just studying for a test.

Another way in which this factor connects to Payne's modern assessment is "objective-based and criterion-referenced". By showing the rubric ahead of time, and displaying several models for the kids to imitate (and NOT imitate), the kids see the objectives that I am searching for in their papers. For example, the criteria on my rubric for research (and literary analysis papers) that is weighed the heaviest is under "Content". It's a 4-point scale, with "Content" multiplied by 6, for a total point value of 24. The kids know here, in very specific language, that if they have a certain amount of quotes that are properly cited and referenced, they can receive a 24/24. In the same vein, the criteria for "Sources" is multiplied by only 2, for a total of 8 points. So if a student uses 5 sources in their paper, with all proper documentation, they can receive an 8/8. This is on the same page as Payne when he says that objectives guide development and interpretation. When you add in the factor of showing several examples, from McTigue, the relevance becomes clearer.

The last connection with Payne's theory is in the area of reliability. If teachers across a curriculum are all using the same rubrics, the assessment will definitely be reliable.