QuestionPunkQuestionPunk
無料で始める
すべてのテンプレート
Education & Academic

Student Perceptions of Grading Rubric Quality

Measures student perceptions of rubric clarity, fairness, and usefulness for learning. Designed for course designers and academic researchers seeking to improve grading transparency and rubric design.

このテンプレートを使うほかのテンプレートを見る

設問の例

テンプレートの内容をプレビューできます。すべての設問は公開前に自由に編集できます。

全21問・約10分
Q01
メッセージ

Welcome! This survey asks about your experience with a grading rubric used in one of your courses this term. Your responses are completely anonymous and will be reported only in aggregate to help improve rubric design and grading practices. Participation is voluntary, and you may stop at any time. There are no right or wrong answers — we are interested in your honest opinions. The survey takes approximately 10 minutes to complete. Please think of one specific rubric from a single course or assignment this term and answer all questions with that rubric in mind.

Q02
選択式

Have you received and reviewed a grading rubric for any course assignment this term?

  • Yes
  • No
Q03
選択式

What type of course used the rubric you are evaluating?

  • STEM lecture
  • STEM lab
  • Humanities
  • Social sciences
  • Arts/design
  • Business
  • Education
  • Professional/health
  • Other
Q04
オピニオンスケール

Overall, how clear was the rubric in communicating what was expected?

スケール: 1 – 7
最小:Not at all clear最大:Extremely clear
Q05
ランク付け

Which of the following improvements to the rubric would be most valuable? Please rank your top three from highest to lowest priority.

  1. Clearer criterion descriptions
  2. More examples or sample work at each level
  3. Explanation of how points are weighted
  4. Sharing the rubric earlier in the course
  5. Greater consistency across graders
  6. More room for creativity or alternative approaches
ドラッグして順位を付ける
Q06
プルダウン

What is your current level of study?

  • High school/secondary
  • Undergraduate
  • Graduate (Master's/Doctoral)
  • Professional program (e.g., JD, MD)
  • Other
  • Prefer not to say
Q07
メッセージ

Thank you for sharing your feedback! Your responses will be used to improve rubric design and grading transparency. If you have any questions about this survey, please contact the research team.

Q08
選択式

What type of assignment used this rubric?

  • Paper/essay
  • Project or presentation
  • Lab report
  • Problem set or exam
  • Participation/discussion
  • Portfolio/studio
  • Other
Q09
オピニオンスケール

Overall, how fair was the grading you received based on this rubric?

スケール: 1 – 7
最小:Not at all fair最大:Extremely fair
Q10
自由回答（長文）

Based on your responses in this survey, please share any additional thoughts about how this rubric could be improved.

Q11
選択式

What is your enrollment status this term?

  • Full-time student
  • Part-time student
  • Not currently enrolled
  • Prefer not to say
Q12
選択式

When did you first receive or access the rubric for this assignment?

  • At the start of the course or unit
  • With the assignment prompt
  • Shortly before the due date
  • After submission
  • After grading
Q13
オピニオンスケール

How useful was the rubric in helping you understand how to improve your work?

スケール: 1 – 7
最小:Not at all useful最大:Extremely useful
Q14
AIインタビュー

We'd like to understand your rubric experience in more depth. An AI moderator will ask you a couple of follow-up questions based on your responses.

Q15
プルダウン

What is your primary field of study?

  • Arts & Humanities
  • Business
  • Education
  • Engineering & Computer Science
  • Health Professions
  • Natural Sciences
  • Social Sciences
  • Undeclared
  • Other
Q16
オピニオンスケール

The criteria in the rubric were relevant to the learning objectives of the assignment.

スケール: 1 – 7
最小:Strongly disagree最大:Strongly agree
Q17
プルダウン

What is your age?

  • Under 18
  • 18–20
  • 21–24
  • 25–34
  • 35–44
  • 45–54
  • 55 or older
  • Prefer not to say
Q18
オピニオンスケール

The performance levels in the rubric (e.g., excellent, good, needs improvement) were clearly distinguished from one another.

スケール: 1 – 7
最小:Strongly disagree最大:Strongly agree
Q19
選択式

What is your gender?

  • Man
  • Woman
  • Non-binary
  • Prefer not to say
Q20
オピニオンスケール

I was able to use the rubric to assess my own work before submitting.

スケール: 1 – 7
最小:Strongly disagree最大:Strongly agree
Q21
オピニオンスケール

The grade I received aligned with how I understood the rubric criteria.

スケール: 1 – 7
最小:Strongly disagree最大:Strongly agree

含まれる機能

  • AIによる深掘り

    自由回答に合わせてAIが追加で質問し、固定のフォームでは拾えない具体的な内容を引き出します。

  • 注意確認設問

    急いだ回答や質の低い回答者を除外する仕組みを標準で備えています。

  • AIが作成する設問文

    文言、設問の順序、条件分岐をAIが調査の目的に合わせて作成します。

  • 自動レポート

    回答が集まると、テーマ、引用、わかりやすい要約が自動で作成されます。

他ツールとの比較

ほかのアンケートツールで最も近いテンプレートを調べました。それぞれの優れている点と、このテンプレートがさらに踏み込んでいる点をまとめています。

このテンプレートを選ぶ理由

  • Includes dedicated opinion-scale items isolating rubric clarity, fairness, usefulness for improvement, and criteria-objective alignment — not just general course satisfaction
  • Pairs closed-ended rubric ratings with a ranking question on preferred rubric improvements and an open-text reflection, giving both quantifiable and qualitative signal
  • Adds an AI follow-up interview to probe student reasoning behind their rubric ratings in depth, something static form builders cannot do
  • Captures context (rubric type, assignment type, timing of receipt) and demographics so researchers can segment rubric perceptions by course/field/study level

Jotform

E-learning Student Performance Evaluation Form Template

A general e-learning performance evaluation form rather than a rubric-specific perception survey; it targets broader student performance/course evaluation rather than isolating rubric clarity, fairness, or usefulness. Useful as a customizable static form but not purpose-built for rubric quality research.

優れている点

  • Ready-to-use drag-and-drop form template within a widely used form builder
  • Likely supports broad customization of fields and branding for e-learning contexts
  • Familiar interface for instructors already using Jotform for course administration

物足りない点

  • Static form fields only — no adaptive AI follow-up questioning to probe why a rubric felt unclear or unfair
  • Not focused on rubric-specific constructs (clarity, fairness, usefulness, criteria-objective alignment)
  • No automated per-response quality scoring or auto-generated analysis report

QuestionPro

Course evaluation sample questions and survey template

A course/teacher evaluation template aimed at overall course quality and instructor performance, not specifically at grading rubric perceptions. It's a reasonable adjacent tool for academic researchers but requires significant editing to focus on rubric clarity and fairness. Presented as a sample question set/template rather than a rubric-focused instrument.

優れている点

  • Established survey platform with course/teacher evaluation question banks
  • Likely offers standard analytics dashboards and reporting for closed-ended responses
  • Template designed with academic researchers and course designers in mind

物足りない点

  • No rubric-specific question set covering criteria relevance, performance-level clarity, or self-assessment ability
  • No adaptive AI interview or voice AI option to explore student reasoning beyond scaled/multiple-choice answers
  • No transparent, published methodology for how any follow-up probing or scoring would work, since none is offered

よくあるご質問

「Student Perceptions of Grading Rubric Quality」テンプレートにはどのような設問が含まれていますか？

すぐに使える設問が21問含まれており、最初の設問は次のとおりです：「Welcome! This survey asks about your experience with a grading rubric used in one of your courses this term. Your respon…」・「Have you received and reviewed a grading rubric for any course assignment this term?」・「What type of course used the rubric you are evaluating?」。すべての設問は上でプレビューでき、自由に編集できます。

このアンケートの回答にはどのくらい時間がかかりますか？

回答者は通常、21問を約10分で回答し終えます。

テンプレートは編集できますか？

はい。公開前であれば、すべての設問、選択肢、順序を編集できます。設問の追加や削除のほか、調査の目的に合わせた作り直しをAIエディターに依頼することもできます。

このテンプレートは無料で使えますか？

はい。エディターで開けば、すぐに編集を始められます。お試しにアカウントは不要で、無料プランでアンケートを公開できます。

公開の準備はできましたか？

このテンプレートをエディターで開いてみてください。最初の回答者が目にする前に、すべてを自由に変更できます。

このテンプレートを使う無料で始める

関連テンプレート

似たテーマのほかの調査もご覧ください。

すべて見る
Education & Academic

Remote Exam Fairness & Privacy Perceptions Survey

Measures student perceptions of fairness, privacy, and acceptability of proctoring practices in remote exams. Designed for higher-education institutions seeking to evaluate and improve remote assessment policies.

テンプレートを見る
Education & Academic

Student Perception of Course Quality Survey

Captures how students genuinely experience a course or program — clarity of teaching, fairness, workload, and engagement — paired with an AI follow-up that digs into the specific moment behind their overall rating. Built for instructors, program leads, and academic affairs teams who want more than end-of-term star ratings.

テンプレートを見る
Education & Academic

Performance Review Fairness & Clarity Assessment

Measures employee perceptions of fairness, clarity, and potential bias in the formal performance review process. Designed for HR teams seeking actionable insights to improve review equity and transparency.

テンプレートを見る
Education & Academic

Professor Teaching Effectiveness Evaluation Survey

Measures how students experience a professor's teaching across clarity, engagement, feedback, availability, and fairness, plus overall satisfaction and likelihood to recommend. Built for academic departments and course coordinators running end-of-term reviews, with an AI follow-up interview that digs into the specific moment or assignment that most shaped a student's rating.

テンプレートを見る
Education & Academic

Faculty Perspectives on AI in Grading & Assessment

An academic research survey exploring faculty attitudes, concerns, and readiness regarding AI-assisted grading and assessment tools. Covers current practices, openness to adoption, concerns about bias/accuracy/privacy, training needs, and willingness to participate in controlled experiments.

テンプレートを見る
Education & Academic

End-of-Class Feedback and Course Improvement Survey

Captures how students experienced a class — clarity of instruction, pacing, workload, and what actually helped them learn — then uses an AI follow-up interview to dig into the specific moment behind their overall rating. Built for instructors and departments who want more than a satisfaction number at term's end.

テンプレートを見る