Extended-Response Essay Rubric (passing score 40+)

Criteria	Rating Scale
	Inadequate (0-5)	Adequate (6-7)	Above Average (8-9)	Exemplary (10)
Organization	Writing lacks logical organization. It shows some coherence but ideas lack unity. Serious errors.	The main points lack detailed development. Ideas are vague with little evidence of critical thinking.	Writing is coherent and logically organized with transitions used between ideas and paragraphs to create coherence. Overall unity of ideas is present.	Content indicates the synthesis of ideas, in-depth analysis, and original thinking.
Level of Content	Content shows some thinking and reasoning but most ideas are underdeveloped and unoriginal.	Content indicates thinking and reasoning applied with original thought on a few ideas.	Content indicates original thinking and develops ideas with sufficient and firm evidence.	Content indicates the synthesis of ideas, in-depth analysis and original thinking.
Development	The main points are presented with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is present.	The essay is free of distracting spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors; absent of fragments, comma splices, and run-ons.	Writing is coherent and logically organized. Some points remain misplaced and stray from the topic. Transitions are evident but not used throughout the essay.	The main points are well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.
Grammar & Mechanics	Writing is coherent and logically organized. Some points remain misplaced and stray from the topic. Transitions are evident but not used throughout the essay.	The essay has few spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors allowing the reader to follow ideas clearly. Very few fragments or run-ons.	Attains college-level style; tone is appropriate and rhetorical devices used to enhance content; sentence variety used effectively.	Content indicates the synthesis of ideas, in-depth analysis, and original thinking.
Style	Mostly in elementary form with little or no variety in sentence structure, diction, rhetorical devices, or emphasis.	Fails to follow format and assignment requirements; incorrect margins, spacing, and indentation; neatness of essay needs attention	Approaches college-level usage of some variety in sentence patterns, diction, and rhetorical devices.	Shows outstanding style going beyond usual college level; rhetorical devices and tone used effectively; creative use of sentence structure and coordination.
Format	Most spelling, punctuation, and grammar are correct allowing the reader to progress through the essay. Some errors remain.	Meets format and assignment requirements; generally correct margins, spacing, and indentations; essay is neat but may have some assembly errors.	Meets format and assignment requirements; margins, spacing, and indentations are correct; essay is neat and correctly assembled.	Meets all formal and assignment requirements; attention to detail; all margins, spacing, and indentations are correct; essay is neat and correctly assembled with a professional look.

Lesson Plan Rubric (passing score 40+)

Create an outline format, see an example.

Criteria	Emerging (0–2)	Developing (3–4)	Mastering (5–6)
Title, Instructor Info & Context	No title or context provided	Title is included with instructor name; limited session details	Title, instructor name, and relevant context (e.g., date, audience) clearly stated
Alignment with Syllabus Objectives	Lesson structure does not reflect syllabus goals	General connection to objectives is present but not consistently reflected	General connection to objectives is present, but not consistently reflected
Content Relevance & Accuracy	Content is vague, off-topic, or lacks rule alignment	Content is mostly accurate but lacks clarity or detail	Content is specific, accurate, and relevant to AMJ and NMJL standards
Logical Structure & Outline Flow	Outline lacks flow or skips key elements	Structure is present but uneven or difficult to follow	Outline is clear, sequential, and easy to teach from
Instructional Approach	No teaching method is implied or stated	Each major section directly supports a stated aim from the syllabus	Outline indicates method or mode of delivery (e.g., storytelling, group discussion, demo)
Engagement Opportunities	No interactive elements are planned	One or two points invite interaction but are underdeveloped	Specific prompts, scenarios, or group moments are built in to encourage learner participation
Reflection or Check for Understanding	No reflection, debrief, or recap included	General time for questions or informal feedback is noted	Built-in reflection prompt, recap, or application check aligns with lesson goals
Reference Materials or Support Notes	No resources, handouts, or references listed	Some materials are implied but not clearly noted	Relevant Mahj Life wiki articles, guidebook, or handout are referenced or included for follow-up or in-class use

Download a syllabus template and see an example.

Criteria	Rating Scale
	Emerging (0-2)	Developing (3-4)	Mastering (4-6)
Course Description	Instructor name and contact info, class time, and location	In addition, lesson prerequisites (if any), and lesson description	In addition, supplemental readings, and resources
Overall Tone	Mechanical, dictatorial	Teacher-oriented	Student/learning-oriented
Class Schedule	Little or no information on what topics will be covered	Topics are shown in a bulleted list	Fully articulated and logically sequenced schedule with topics shown in a bulleted list along with any required reading and preparation necessary from students
Course Format	Vague, or cryptic descriptions of course expectations and how class time will be used	Mutual role expectations for students and the instructor are explained, together with various teaching methods and modes	Role expectations and class format are explained in such a way that students understand the underlying rationale and benefits for them
Course Outcomes	Not articulated	Stated in general, but vague and uses unmeasurable terms	Listed with appropriate, descriptive verbs that lend themselves to measurement and seek high levels of learning (see Bloom’s taxonomy)
Assessment of Student’s Learning	No information about how the student’s learning will be assessed	Brief information about how the student’s learning will be assessed	Entailed information about how the student’s learning will be assessed
Alignment	No clear connection between lesson outcomes and assessments	The apparent connection between lesson outcomes and assessments	The clear connection between lesson outcomes and assessments
Variety of Teaching & Assessment Methods	Lesson teaching is all similar (i.e., all lectures), and no indication of assessments	Lesson teaching and assessment methods are similar (i.e., presentation, lectures, written tests, hands-on skill builders)	Lesson teaching and assessment methods are varied (i.e., presentation, lectures, written tests, hands-on skill builders)
Continuity of Feedback to Students on Their Learning	No mention of obtaining student feedback on their progress	One method of obtaining student feedback on their progress is mentioned	Several methods of obtaining student feedback on their progress are mentioned
Opportunity for Students to Evaluation the Lesson	Students only opportunity to provide a lesson evaluation is at the end of the lesson	The instructor provided a brief  evaluation sheet for immediate response or asked for feedback in the chat	The instructor created an in-depth lesson evaluation survey

See Bloom’s Taxonomy (University of Arkansas) for help with defining course outcomes.

Lesson Evaluation Rubric (passing score 4+)

Download the lesson evaluation.

This rubric evaluates an instructor’s readiness to coach players using the American Mah Jongg Experience Level Evaluation (ELE). The focus is on clarity, interpretation, coaching presence, and student-centered guidance.

Criteria	Rating Scale
	Emerging (0-2)	Developing (3-4)	Mastering (4-6)
ELE Results Interpretation	Misinterprets results or relies too heavily on total scores. Struggles to connect ELE data to the player’s lived experience of the game.	Interprets ELE results accurately but focuses primarily on surface-level observations. Some patterns are identified, though connections between dimensions may be limited.	Accurately interprets ELE results and the Wheel of Life shape, identifying meaningful patterns, contrasts, and clusters. Demonstrates a clear understanding of layered and uneven growth across dimensions.
Identification of Strengths	Strengths are unclear, overstated, or disconnected from the results. Focus tends to drift toward weaknesses rather than assets.	Identifies strengths but explanations lack depth or specificity. Some strengths may be described in general terms rather than tied to the ELE results.	Clearly identifies three relevant strengths and explains why each one matters to the player’s development. Strengths are specific, grounded, and appropriately framed.
Identification of Growth Areas	Growth areas feel unfocused, overwhelming, or misaligned with the student’s level. Difficulty distinguishing immediate needs from long-term goals.	Growth areas are reasonable but not clearly prioritized. Explanations may be brief or not fully connected to the student’s experience.	Identifies three growth areas that are appropriate for the student’s current level and readiness. Demonstrates thoughtful prioritization rather than attempting to address everything at once.
Quality of Next-Step Recommendations	Next steps are vague, overly complex, or mismatched to the student’s needs. Limited connection between results and recommendations.	Next steps are relevant but somewhat broad or loosely defined. Alignment with ELE results is present but could be clearer.	Proposes targeted, achievable next steps that align clearly with ELE results and the student’s experience level. Recommendations feel realistic, supportive, and actionable.
Use of Open-Ended (Socratic) Questioning	Relies primarily on telling or instructing. Limited evidence of reflective or exploratory questioning.	Uses some open-ended questions but occasionally defaults to explaining or leading the student toward an answer.	Uses open-ended questions skillfully to invite reflection, insight, and ownership. Demonstrates curiosity over correction and allows space for student responses.
Use of the ELE Wheel of Life	The Wheel is underutilized or treated as a formality. Limited connection between the visual and coaching guidance.	References the Wheel but does not fully leverage it as a reflective coaching tool. Discussion may remain descriptive rather than exploratory.	Uses the Wheel of Life effectively as a visual tool to support insight and discussion. Helps the student connect the shape of the wheel to feelings of confidence, comfort, and readiness for growth.
Coaching Presence & Tone (Debrief Simulation)	Tone feels corrective, evaluative, or overly instructional. Limited emphasis on encouragement or partnership.	Tone is generally supportive but uneven. Occasional over-teaching or rushed delivery may reduce reflective space.	Demonstrates a warm, supportive, and confidence-building coaching presence. Communication feels collaborative, encouraging, and student-centered.
Professionalism & Ethical Coaching	Coaching approach risks judgment or discouragement. ELE philosophy is not clearly upheld	Professional intent is evident but inconsistently applied. Some language may unintentionally create pressure or confusion.	Upholds the spirit of ELE as a growth-based, non-judgmental tool. Demonstrates ethical, respectful, and encouraging communication throughout.

The final results will be provided by email within five business days.