Evidence synthesis rubric

// Moderate a transparent, source-linked comparison of studies with distinct evidence-based descriptors; this illustrative rubric is not a validated instrument.
// Synthetic worked example: all entities, schedules and measurements are illustrative.
// Every string below is EXAMPLE text from a fictional model: replace it.
// Replace assumptions and inputs before applying this model to actual work.

rubric assessment {
  title: "Illustrative Evidence synthesis rubric"
  course: "Advanced professional practice"
  assignment: "Compare studies using a transparent, source-linked synthesis"
  author: "Flowss teaching example"
}

criterion criterion_0 {
  name: "Search scope"
  weight: .25
  description: "Selection process is reproducible"
}

level level_0_0 {
  criterion: criterion_0
  label: "Emerging"
  points: 1
  descriptor: "Lists papers without inclusion rules"
}

level level_0_1 {
  criterion: criterion_0
  label: "Proficient"
  points: 2
  descriptor: "Records search and selection decisions"
}

level level_0_2 {
  criterion: criterion_0
  label: "Advanced"
  points: 3
  descriptor: "Evaluates coverage gaps and selection bias"
}

criterion criterion_1 {
  name: "Extraction"
  weight: .25
  description: "Evidence is traceable to sources"
}

level level_1_0 {
  criterion: criterion_1
  label: "Emerging"
  points: 1
  descriptor: "Mixes claims and interpretations"
}

level level_1_1 {
  criterion: criterion_1
  label: "Proficient"
  points: 2
  descriptor: "Preserves source locations and study context"
}

level level_1_2 {
  criterion: criterion_1
  label: "Advanced"
  points: 3
  descriptor: "Checks discrepant extractions independently"
}

criterion criterion_2 {
  name: "Integration"
  weight: .25
  description: "Comparison explains convergence and divergence"
}

level level_2_0 {
  criterion: criterion_2
  label: "Emerging"
  points: 1
  descriptor: "Summarises papers one by one"
}

level level_2_1 {
  criterion: criterion_2
  label: "Proficient"
  points: 2
  descriptor: "Compares methods and findings thematically"
}

level level_2_2 {
  criterion: criterion_2
  label: "Advanced"
  points: 3
  descriptor: "Explains heterogeneity and competing interpretations"
}

criterion criterion_3 {
  name: "Certainty"
  weight: .25
  description: "Confidence reflects evidence limitations"
}

level level_3_0 {
  criterion: criterion_3
  label: "Emerging"
  points: 1
  descriptor: "Labels all included work reliable"
}

level level_3_1 {
  criterion: criterion_3
  label: "Proficient"
  points: 2
  descriptor: "Discusses study limitations and inconsistency"
}

level level_3_2 {
  criterion: criterion_3
  label: "Advanced"
  points: 3
  descriptor: "Justifies conclusion strength without checklist shortcuts"
}

view criteria: rubric_grid