Asphalt Art Rubric - errors?

Correct me if I am wrong but all 3 items in the first column say the same thing – create a new subclass that extends PainterPlus. The second column says the same thing. So which criteria is used for Extensive Evidence vs. Convincing Evidence?

@awright - Hi Amy, my read of the rubric is that for Extensive Evidence a new subclass must be created and used in the art design in addition the student must create an additional subclass that is also used in the design. Convincing Evidence requires only one subclass be created. Hope this helps.


Then what is the β€œOR”? I took it to mean the student uses Mural Painter and a new subclass or just the new subclass.


The way that I read the rubric is that the Extensive & Convincing Evidence sections must both have the following criteria in order to be satifisfied:

Creates a new subclass of the PainterPlus class that is used as a component of the asphalt art design

However, the Extensive Evidence section also has the additional requirement of creating an additional subclass. Examining the rubric, it appears as though there was originally going to be a choice (OR statement) from which the students could select. It looks like something was lost in translation here. I have gone ahead and updated the rubric to remove the redundant criteria in order to help simplify the scoring process.


Thanks so much for bringing this to our attention!


1 Like

Hi Teammates,

I made this visual for my students because I was also wrestling with differentiating between the Extensive Evidence and the Convincing Evidence criteria link.



Thanks Sam for the visual. I will share it with my CSA cohort.

1 Like