Table 1 Rubric for assessing the concept map (CM)
Criteria / Score | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Arguments and supporting information | All five arguments and five justifications with supporting items of information are included. | Three-four arguments and justifications with supporting items of information are included. | One or two arguments and justifications with supporting items of information are included. | Arguments and justifications with supporting items of information are incomplete and/or incorrect. |
Hierarchy | The organization is complete and correct. The supporting information corroborates the arguments. | The organization is correct but incomplete. Most of the supporting information corroborates the arguments. | The organization is correct but incomplete. Most of the supporting information does not corroborate the arguments. | The organization is incomplete and/or incorrect. |
Relationships among arguments / supporting information | Relationships were specified and well-explained. Links to ethical values were added and explained. | Relationships were partly specified but explained. Links to ethical values were partly added but explained. | Relationships were partly specified but not explained. Links to ethical values were partly added but not explained. | Relationships were partly or not specified and poorly/not explained. Links to ethical values were incorrect or missing. |
Simplicity and easiness of understanding | The design is simple and easy to understand. | Some relationships are difficult to understand. | There is an excessive number of connections. | Neither the relationships nor the hierarchy are understandable. |