Skip to main content
sign in
Username
Password
forgot?
Share
help_outline
help
Please enable JavaScript on your web browser
menu
iRubric: Problem Solving & CT VALUE Rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Problem Solving & CT VALUE Rubric
Problem solving is the process of designing, evaluating and implementing a strategy to answer an open-ended question or achieve a desired goal. This rubric distills the common elements of most problem-solving contexts and is designed to function across all disciplines. It is broad-based enough to allow for individual differences among learners, yet is concise and descriptive in its scope to determine how well students have maximized their respective abilities to practice thinking through problems in order to reach solutions. This rubric is designed to measure the quality of a process, rather than the quality of an end-product. As a result, work samples or collections of work will need to include some evidence of the individual’s thinking about a problem-solving task (e.g., reflections on the process from problem to proposed solution; steps in a problem-based learning assignment; record of think-aloud protocol while solving a problem). Courtesy of AAC&U
Rubric Code:
Z4B64
By
teachme
Ready to use
Public Rubric
History enabled
Subject:
(General)
Type:
(Other)
Grade Levels:
Undergraduate, Graduate
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
Problem Solving & CT VALUE Rubric
Descriptions
Excellent
4 pts
Good
3 pts
Fair
2 pts
Poor
1 pts
Problem Solving
Define Problem
Excellent
Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors.
Good
Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, and problem statement is adequately detailed.
Fair
Begins to demonstrate the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, but problem statement is superficial.
Poor
Demonstrates a limited ability in identifying a problem statement or related contextual factors.
Identify Strategies
Excellent
Identifies multiple approaches for solving the problem that apply within a specific context.
Good
Identifies multiple approaches for solving the problem, only some of which apply within a specific context.
Fair
Identifies only a single approach for solving the problem that does apply within a specific context.
Poor
Identifies one or more approaches for solving the problem that do not apply within a specific context.
Propose Solutions/Hypotheses
Excellent
Proposes one or more solutions/hypotheses that indicates a deep comprehension of the problem. Solution/hypotheses are sensitive to contextual factors as well as all of the following: ethical, logical, and cultural dimensions of the problem.
Good
Proposes one or more solutions/hypotheses that indicates comprehension of the problem. Solutions/hypotheses are sensitive to contextual factors as well as the one of the following: ethical, logical, or cultural dimensions of the problem.
Fair
Proposes one solution/hypothesis that is “off the shelf” rather than individually designed to address the specific contextual factors of the problem.
Poor
Proposes a solution/hypothesis that is difficult to evaluate because it is vague or only indirectly addresses the problem statement.
Evaluate Potential Solutions
Excellent
Evaluation of solutions is deep and elegant (for example, contains thorough and insightful explanation) and includes, deeply and thoroughly, all of the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution.
Good
Evaluation of solutions is adequate (for example, contains thorough explanation) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution.
Fair
Evaluation of solutions is brief (for example, explanation lacks depth) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution.
Poor
Evaluation of solutions is superficial (for example, contains cursory, surface level explanation) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/reasoning, examines feasibility of solution, and weighs impacts of solution.
Implement Solution
Excellent
Implements the solution in a manner that addresses thoroughly and deeply multiple contextual factors of the problem.
Good
Implements the solution in a manner that addresses multiple contextual factors of the problem in a surface manner.
Fair
Implements the solution in a manner that addresses the problem statement but ignores relevant contextual factors.
Poor
Implements the solution in a manner that does not directly address the problem statement.
Evaluate Outcomes
Excellent
Reviews results relative to the problem defined with thorough, specific considerations of need for further work.
Good
Reviews results relative to the problem defined with some consideration of need for further work.
Fair
Reviews results in terms of the problem defined with little, if any, consideration of need for further work.
Poor
Reviews results superficially in terms of the problem defined with no consideration of need for further work.
Critical Thinking
Explanation of Issues
Excellent
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding.
Good
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions.
Fair
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown.
Poor
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description.
Conclusions and Outcomes
Excellent
Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order
Good
Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
Fair
Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
Poor
Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.
Keywords:
Problem solving, Contextual factors, Strategy, Solution
Subjects:
(General)
Types:
(Other)
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More (General) rubrics
More (Other) rubrics
Do more with this rubric:
Preview
Preview this rubric.
Edit
Modify this rubric.
Copy
Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.
Print
Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize
Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark
Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run
Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade
Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate
Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish
Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email
Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss
Discuss this rubric with other members.
Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.
Only with iRubric
tm
.
Copyright © 2024
Reazon Systems, Inc.
All rights reserved.
n98
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.