K–12 Rubric Bank

Editable, print-friendly rubrics with five performance levels: Beginning [1], Developing [2], Proficient [3], Good [4], Excellent [5].

Critical Thinking Rubric Grades 6–12

Criteria: Reasoning and Evidence, Questioning, Connections

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Reasoning and Evidence	Little or no evidence. Reasoning missing or inaccurate.	Limited or partially relevant evidence. Reasoning sometimes unclear or flawed.	Adequate evidence with mostly clear reasoning.	Relevant and accurate evidence with clear logic.	Highly relevant, sufficient evidence. Reasoning precise and compelling.
Questioning	Rarely asks questions.	Asks few or superficial questions.	Asks relevant questions that support understanding.	Routinely asks thoughtful questions that push thinking.	Consistently asks deep, open questions that advance inquiry.
Connections	No connections beyond task.	Vague or obvious connections.	Some relevant connections across ideas or contexts.	Clear connections across texts, ideas, or experiences.	Insightful and original connections to real contexts.

Participation and Effort Rubric All Grades

Criteria: Engagement, Persistence, Preparation

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Engagement	Often off task or distracted.	Inconsistent attention.	Usually attentive and participates when prompted.	Engaged and contributes without prompting.	Highly engaged and elevates class participation.
Persistence	Gives up quickly when challenged.	Needs frequent support to continue.	Uses some strategies to continue working.	Applies strategies and revises work to improve.	Demonstrates sustained effort and models productive struggle.
Preparation	Rarely prepared.	Sometimes missing materials.	Usually prepared with required materials.	Consistently prepared and organized.	Fully prepared and anticipates resource needs.

Collaboration and Teamwork Rubric All Grades

Criteria: Contribution, Respect and Listening, Responsibility

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Contribution	Minimal input.	Uneven contribution.	Contributes ideas and work as assigned.	Adds valuable ideas that move work forward.	Leads with ideas and supports others to contribute.
Respect and Listening	Interrupts or dismisses peers.	Sometimes disregards others.	Listens and responds appropriately.	Encourages all voices and builds on ideas.	Creates inclusive climate and mediates conflicts.
Responsibility	Roles unfulfilled and deadlines missed.	Needs reminders to meet expectations.	Fulfills role and meets most deadlines.	Dependable and high quality deliverables.	Models reliability and helps others meet goals.

Narrative Writing Rubric Grades 3–8

Criteria: Organization, Details and Description, Conventions

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Organization	Disorganized events. No clear ending.	Partial structure. Confusing sequence.	Clear sequence with basic beginning and end.	Well sequenced with purposeful transitions.	Engaging arc with effective pacing and closure.
Details and Description	Very few details.	Limited or repetitive details.	Some descriptive details that clarify events.	Rich details develop characters and setting.	Vivid, precise details that enhance tone and theme.
Conventions	Frequent errors that block meaning.	Errors sometimes affect meaning.	Some errors but meaning clear.	Few minor errors.	Control of grammar, punctuation, and spelling.

Argumentative Writing Rubric Grades 6–12

Criteria: Claim or Thesis, Evidence, Counterarguments, Conventions

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Claim or Thesis	Missing or unclear.	Stated but vague or not debatable.	Clear and debatable.	Focused and insightful.	Nuanced claim that frames the entire argument.
Evidence	Weak or absent evidence.	Limited or loosely connected evidence.	Relevant evidence is integrated with explanation.	Varied and credible evidence that is well integrated.	Compelling and sufficient evidence with strong synthesis.
Counterarguments	Ignored.	Mentioned without response.	Addressed with basic rebuttal.	Anticipated and responded to effectively.	Anticipated, fairly represented, and refuted with strength.
Conventions	Frequent errors.	Some errors reduce clarity.	Mostly correct with minor issues.	Few errors and varied sentence control.	Precise control of language and mechanics.

Research Project Rubric Grades 6–12

Criteria: Question or Focus, Sources, Synthesis, Citations

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Question or Focus	Vague or missing.	Broad or unfocused.	Clear and researchable.	Focused and purposeful.	Sharp focus that guides all decisions.
Sources	Few or low quality sources.	Some credible sources.	Adequate range of credible sources.	Strong range and variety of high quality sources.	Extensive, authoritative sources used strategically.
Synthesis	List of facts without connection.	Limited integration across sources.	Integrates ideas with basic analysis.	Insightful integration with clear analysis.	Sophisticated synthesis that produces new insight.
Citations	Missing or incorrect format.	Inconsistent application of a style.	Mostly correct formatting.	Correct and consistent formatting.	Flawless and complete documentation.

Reading Response Rubric Grades 4–10

Criteria: Comprehension, Textual Evidence, Reflection

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Comprehension	Inaccurate or missing understanding.	Partial understanding.	Accurate basic understanding.	Accurate and thorough understanding.	Deep understanding with insight into craft and meaning.
Textual Evidence	Little or no evidence.	General references with weak quotations.	Specific quotes with explanation.	Purposeful quotations integrated smoothly.	Highly relevant quotations woven into analysis.
Reflection	No connections made.	Simple or personal connections only.	Relevant connections to ideas or self.	Strong connections to texts and world.	Insightful connections that extend interpretation.

Math Problem Solving Rubric Grades 3–12

Criteria: Understanding, Process, Accuracy, Explanation

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Understanding	Misunderstands problem.	Partial understanding.	Understands what is asked.	Understands nuances and constraints.	Anticipates implications and edge cases.
Process	No clear strategy.	Inefficient or incorrect strategy.	Logical strategy.	Efficient strategy with checking.	Multiple strategies and justification for choice.
Accuracy	Frequent errors.	Several errors.	Mostly accurate calculations.	Accurate with self correction.	Accurate and precise throughout.
Explanation	Little or no explanation.	Limited explanation.	Clear explanation of steps.	Explains why steps work.	Justifies reasoning with mathematical structure.

Science Lab Report Rubric Grades 6–12

Criteria: Hypothesis and Purpose, Procedure and Data, Analysis and Conclusion

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Hypothesis and Purpose	Missing or not testable.	Stated but unclear or weak.	Clear and testable.	Focused and aligned to purpose.	Insightful hypothesis that predicts outcomes.
Procedure and Data	Unclear steps or inaccurate data.	Incomplete procedure and inconsistent data.	Replicable steps and mostly accurate data.	Thorough steps and accurate, organized data.	High precision methods and well structured datasets.
Analysis and Conclusion	No analysis or unsupported claims.	Limited analysis with weak links to data.	Conclusion supported by data.	Clear analysis that explains trends and error.	Insightful analysis that connects to theory and next steps.

Engineering Design Rubric Grades 5–12

Criteria: Problem Definition, Design Process, Functionality, Creativity

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Problem Definition	Vague statement.	Partial constraints identified.	Clear statement with key constraints.	Well specified criteria and limits.	Precise definition with measurable success metrics.
Design Process	Little iteration.	Few tests or revisions.	Iterates based on results.	Multiple test-revise cycles with data.	Deliberate, data-driven iterations that optimize performance.
Functionality	Does not meet need.	Partially meets need.	Meets need under normal conditions.	Reliable under varied conditions.	Exceeds criteria with robust performance.
Creativity	Little originality.	Limited novelty.	Some original elements.	Fresh approach that adds value.	Highly innovative while practical.

Project Based Learning Product Rubric All Grades

Criteria: Content Accuracy, Complexity and Depth, Presentation and Polish

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Content Accuracy	Many inaccuracies.	Some inaccuracies.	Mostly accurate content.	Accurate and aligned to standards.	Accurate, precise, and well supported.
Complexity and Depth	Shallow treatment.	Limited depth.	Adequate depth for task.	Substantial depth and insight.	Sophisticated understanding and transfer.
Presentation and Polish	Incomplete or messy.	Basic formatting with issues.	Clear structure with minor issues.	Professional clarity and formatting.	Highly polished and audience ready.

Reflection Rubric Grades 4–12

Criteria: Depth of Thought, Connection to Growth, Clarity

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Depth of Thought	Vague statements.	Surface observations.	Explains what was learned.	Analyzes why learning happened.	Generates insights that inform future action.
Connection to Growth	No connection to growth.	General growth statements.	Identifies strengths and needs.	Sets relevant next steps.	Sets specific goals and strategies with evidence.
Clarity	Unclear communication.	Partly clear.	Mostly clear and coherent.	Clear and well organized.	Concise, precise, and engaging.

Presentation Rubric Grades 4–12

Criteria: Content and Organization, Delivery, Visuals

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Content and Organization	Inaccurate or little structure.	Some inaccuracies or weak structure.	Accurate with clear structure.	Well organized and engaging.	Compelling structure that enhances message.
Delivery	Unclear or monotone.	Inconsistent clarity or eye contact.	Mostly clear with basic engagement.	Confident and engaging.	Dynamic delivery that sustains attention.
Visuals	Missing or distracting.	Minimal effectiveness.	Support content adequately.	Clear, polished visuals that aid understanding.	Highly effective visuals that elevate communication.

Creativity Rubric All Grades

Criteria: Originality, Risk Taking, Elaboration

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Originality	Predictable ideas.	Limited novelty.	Some unique elements.	Fresh combinations or perspectives.	Highly original with clear purpose.
Risk Taking	Avoids trying new approaches.	Needs prompting to try new ideas.	Willing to attempt new approaches.	Experiments and learns from results.	Explores bold ideas and adapts based on feedback.
Elaboration	Ideas undeveloped.	Limited detail or refinement.	Adequate detail and refinement.	Well developed with purposeful detail.	Richly developed with high craft and finish.

Digital Literacy Rubric Grades 6–12

Criteria: Research and Evaluation, Responsible Use, Communication

Criteria	Beginning [1]	Developing [2]	Proficient [3]	Good [4]	Excellent [5]
Research and Evaluation	Accepts sources without question.	Basic checks for credibility.	Evaluates sources for relevance and reliability.	Compares sources and detects bias.	Triangulates evidence and justifies credibility judgments.
Responsible Use	Unsafe or unethical behaviors.	Inconsistent safety or attribution.	Follows guidelines for safety and attribution.	Consistently ethical and safe choices.	Models digital citizenship and supports peers.
Communication	Ineffective tool choice and clarity.	Basic clarity with limited purpose alignment.	Appropriate tools and mostly clear message.	Tools enhance clarity and audience fit.	Strategic tool use that maximizes clarity and impact.