Skip to main content

iRubric: Problem Solving & CT VALUE Rubric

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

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

Preview this rubric.

Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.

Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.

Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.

Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.

Assess

Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.

Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.

Share

Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.

Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubric^tm.

n79