Rubric Usage Knowledge for Group Assignment: An analysis of Vocational Colleges

Rubrics are tools used to measure student performance through group work. Instructors should know the use of rubrics to assess student assignments in groups. This study was conducted to identify the level of knowledge in rubric usage for group assignments among Vocational College instructors in the state of Johor, Malaysia. Differences in instructors’ rubric usage knowledge for group assignments based on gender and the relationship between the knowledge and teaching experience were also studied. A total of 293 instructors were involved in this study. A quantitative approach using survey design was applied. The questionnaire containing 15 dichotomous items was administered using the google form application. Data were analysed using SPSS 23. Findings showed th at instructors’ knowledge of rubrics used in group work assessment is high. The level of knowledge in rubric usage for group assignments among the instructors was found to have a significant mean difference based on gender. It also has a significant relationship between the level of knowledge in rubric usage for group assignments and teaching experience. In summary, this study is expected to provide input to stakeholders in improving the existing alternative assessment practice in Vocational Colleges in Malaysia. Therefore, suggestions for improvement are given for the intervention.


Introduction
In the face of today's changing globalisation, education shapes individuals' knowledge, skills, and personalities, which become the primary drivers of economic success, individual well-being, and community unity. Nevertheless, the skills gap continues to be high as indemand skills across employment change over the next five years (World Economic Forum, 2020). Skills that will be employers' main focus by 2025 are critical thinking, problem-solving, and self-management skills such as active learning, resilience, stress tolerance, and flexibility. Thus, through the Vocational Technical Education and Training Division (VTETD), the Malaysian Ministry of Education has taken the initiative by implementing Outcome-Based Education (OBE). Soft skills (SS) are applied to produce competitive, competent and marketable graduates.
According to Bahri et al (2020), the implementation of OBE requires every academic program in Vocational Colleges (VC) to have Program Educational Outcomes (PEO). PEOs are statements that describe the educational outcomes that each student in an academic program must achieve after being in the world of work for between 3-5 years. PEOs were designed to meet the needs and expectations of stakeholders. There are nine graduate characteristics required; i) good personality, ii) good communication skills, iii) positive attitude, iv) good soft skills, v) practical skills, vi) good knowledge, vii) produce quality work, viii) problem-solving skills, and ix) demonstrate quality leadership skills. PEOs of VC in Malaysia has considered learning domains, including cognitive, psychomotor, and affective.
The implementation of OBE also proves that VC has taken the initiative to strengthen Alternative Assessment (AA) because it provides a broad picture of student learning experiences. AA provides opportunities for students to demonstrate the ability to reason and analyse, apply knowledge in new situations, demonstrate their understanding of the relationship between concepts, and communicate their knowledge in various ways (Ahmad et al., 2020). Most Higher Learning Institutions (HEI) in Malaysia are also seen to be more inclined to implement AA (Kaur et al., 2017) due to pedagogical and practical factors (Trytten, 2001). Thus, most HEI implements AA by assigning assignments that require students to work in groups. In addition, the needs of the current industry are in dire need of graduates who are capable of working in a team. Therefore, the instructors should play an essential role in developing students' ability to work in groups (Butt, 2018).
Using group work (GW) to support students' learning in educational settings requires instructors to assess and grade students' knowledge and skills (Forsell et al., 2020). Evaluating a group is a difficult task, and the instructor should have a clear idea of how they want to consider the group work (Burke, 2011). In addition, the instructor had used lack of methods and techniques to assess group assignments (Khuzwayo, 2018). Therefore, the instructor should use a rubric, which includes the criteria for judging the work and the student's mastery of the material (Finson & Ormsbee, 1998). Although rubrics have become popular in assessing various performance-based tasks, many instructors remain unaware of rubrics and their enormous benefits (Chowdury, 2019). Therefore, this study aims to identify the knowledge of rubrics usage for group assignments among VC instructors based on the following questions; i.
What is the rubric usage knowledge for group assignments among VC instructors? ii.
Is there any significant mean difference in rubric usage knowledge for group assignments among VC instructors based on gender?
iii. Is there any significant relationship between the rubric usage knowledge for group assignments and teaching experience among VC instructors?

Literature Review
Scholars and policymakers are increasingly agreeing that the higher education system should be supported to renew and reshape teaching and evaluation practices (McAleese et al., 2013). There has been a paradigm shift from traditional form assessment practices to AA assessment approaches (Ahmad et al., 2020). AA refers to types of evaluation that include a variety of tasks that require all learners to use higher-level thinking skills in real-life or authentic situations (Al Ruqeishi, 2015). Students giving each other feedback, students assessing their strengths and weaknesses, and groups discussing how they can work together are examples of AA (Yutaka, 2019). AA is also known as Performance-Based Assessment (PBA) based on the following criteria (Stevenson, 2001); i.
allow students to create their responses rather than selecting from a list of pre-made options. ii.
are criterion-referenced, or provide a standard against which a student's work is assessed rather than in comparison to other students iii.
focus on the problem-solving process rather than just getting the correct answer, and iv.
compel trained teachers or others to evaluate the assessments and ensure consistency across scorers carefully.
Thus, group assignment (GA) has added value to existing teaching methods in Higher Education (Cheng, Lam & Chan, 2008). GA is defined as students collaborating in a small enough group so that everyone can participate in an assigned learning task (Cohen & Lotan, 2014). GA provides students with simulated workplace projects that allow them to gain valuable teamwork experience and improve abilities such as communication and group skills (McCorkle et al., 1999). This approach also empowers cooperative learning (Sharan, 2010), where GA can help students develop a sense of "team" to support learning with each other (Peterson and Miller, 2004). As students work in groups, they know to share ideas and help each other build new knowledge (France and Kottke, 2013). Students learn by problemsolving and observation through collaborative activities (Onwuegbuzie, Collins & Jiao, 2009). GA also produce high-achieving students by storing information longer than individual assignments (Johnson and Johnson, 1986;Sobral, 1997). However, many benefits of GA are only possible when students communicate and collaborate (Gordon & Connor, 2001). Thus, GA needs to be well planned to be implemented effectively.
There are four stages of GA; getting started, teaching students, monitoring the group process and evaluation (Burke, 2011). First, the instructor must decide whether or not to include group work in the class. The syllabus should consist of group projects. The second stage entails teaching the students how to collaborate in groups. Instructors cannot assume that students understand how to collaborate, manage time, and delegate tasks. The instructor must be able to teach the students how to work collaboratively and effectively in groups. Then, it would lead to the third stage, which involves group monitoring. The final and most crucial step for the students is group evaluation. For grading the students, the instructor must create a concrete rubric. Rubrics are recommended because they help students focus their efforts, improve achievement, reduce grading time for the instructor, and improve the effectiveness of feedback (Stevens and Levi, 2013).
The rubric is a learning and assessment tool that articulates the expectations for assignments and performance tasks by listing criteria and describing levels of quality for each standard (Andrade, 2000;Arter & Chappuis, 2007;Stiggins, 2001). Rubrics must have four key components (Stevens & Levi, 2013); i. a task description or descriptive title of the task students are expected to produce or perform; ii.
a scale (and scoring) that describes the level of mastery (e.g., exceed expectation, meets expectation, does not meet expectation); iii.
components/dimensions students are to attend to in completing the assignment/tasks (e.g., types of skills, knowledge, etc.); and iv.
description of the performance quality (performance descriptor) of the components/dimensions at each level of mastery.
In conclusion, AA is a form of assessment that is implemented continuously (formative) to assess the development of students from cognitive, psychomotor and affective aspects. GA is one of the AA techniques involving using rubrics to evaluate student performance where marks are given based on standards. GA is a PBA measured based on specific criteria and interpreted as a criterion-referenced assessment (CRA). Therefore, PBA requires students to demonstrate knowledge and skills, including how they solve problems. PBA measures skills such as integrating knowledge across disciplines, contributing to the work of a group, and developing a plan of action when confronted with a new situation (Project Appleseed, 2010).

Methodology
The study design is an action that shows in detail how a study is conducted (Sabitha, 2006). The study design is also characterised as a specific method to obtain the information needed to explain the study's objectives (Najib, 1999). A cross-sectional survey study design was applied in this study because data collection on one type of sample from the studied population was done only once based on existing respondent attributes (Malhotra, Sham, and Crsip, 1996). A total of 293 instructors from 10 VCs in the state of Johor were involved in this study. A survey containing 15 dichotomous items were distributed through the google form application. At the same time, the instructors attended the Rubric Development Course for GA organised by Segamat VC. The course was conducted online using a webex application following the Movement Control Order (MCO) enforcement, which is currently in force due to the spread of Covid-19.
Data analyses were performed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics involving frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation had been used to analyse instructors' demographics and the level of knowledge in rubric usage for GA. As shown in Table 1, the One-Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was conducted to ensure that gender and teaching experience data were normally distributed. So that the inferential statistics involving parametric analyses, i.e., independent t-test and Pearson correlation, could be conducted. The independent t-test was used to analyse the differences in the level of knowledge in rubric usage for GA among instructors based on gender. At the same time, Pearson correlation is used to identify the relationship between the level of knowledge in rubric usage among instructors with teaching experience. . 000 c a.
Test distribution is normal. b.
Calculated from data c.

The Rubric Usage Knowledge for Group Assignments
The score range is between 33 to 100. A total of 158 (54%) instructors obtained scores between 33 to 67. While 135 (46%) instructors got scores 73 to 100. The number of instructors who scored lower than the mean value was higher. 2.0 100 1 0.3 Next, the mean value of the score was divided into five levels based on the procedure proposed by Best (1977) to interpret the level of knowledge in rubric usage for GA, as shown in Table 4. The overall mean obtained shows that the instructor's knowledge in rubric usage for GA is high (M = 69.2, SD = 10.6), as detailed in Table 5.  A total of 15 dichotomous items were administered to the respondents. A total of five items (B1, B4, B7, B11, B15) exceeded 90%, followed by three items (B5, B10, B13) exceeded 80%, only one item (B9) exceeded 70%, and also item (B2) exceeded 60 % instructor who answered the question correctly. Nevertheless, only 99 (33.8%) instructors answered correctly for item B3. For item B6, only 25 (8.5%) and item B8, only 81 (27.6%) instructors answered correctly. For items B12 and B14, 131 (44.7%) and 159 (54.3%) instructors gave the wrong answers, respectively. The findings showed that the items answered correctly by almost all instructors gave a high mean score for the level of knowledge in rubric usage for GA. Most instructors are less sure about the concepts and aspects assessed in GA. The instructors were also unable to distinguish the type of rubric and less clear about the anatomy of the rubric.

Differences Rubric Usage Knowledge for GA based on Gender
Group statistics are shown in Table 6 in instructors' rubric usage knowledge for GA. The male instructors with a score value (M = 67.4, SD = 10.6) and females are 188 with a score value (M = 70.1, SD = 10.5). The mean value obtained shows that the level of knowledge of female instructors is higher than males. The mean of female instructors is higher than the average mean (69.2) of the level of knowledge, while the male instructors are lower. Next, Table 7 is referred to interpret the differences in the knowledge of instructors based on gender. The significance value for Levene's Test shown in Table 7 is 0.70 and larger than 0.05. Therefore, the value of equal variances assumed needs to be used with the value of Sig.  Cohen (1988) for interpreting the value are; 0.01 = small effect 0.06 = moderate effect 0.14 = large effect The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference = -2.70, 95% CI: -5.23 to -0.16) was very small (eta squared = 0.01).

The Relationship between the Rubric Usage Knowledge for GA and Teaching Experience
The relationship between the instructor's knowledge in rubric usage for GA and the teaching experience was investigated using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, as shown in Table 8. Preliminary analyses were performed to ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity and homoscedasticity. Findings showed that p = 0.70, which is more than the p-value of 0.05. It meant that the null hypothesis was rejected. There was a weak and positive correlation between the two variables, r = 0.02, n = 293, p > 0.05.

Discussion
This study found that the knowledge in rubric usage for group assignments of the instructors as a whole is high. The mean score for female instructors is higher than males, and experienced instructors have better knowledge of rubric usage for GA. The findings informed instructors that assessment is part of the curriculum (Scarino, 2017) as AA is currently considered the universal assessment practice in fostering student learning (Green, 2017). Therefore, the instructors should understand and practice rubrics as standard tools to assess student performance, such as presentations, project assignments, and practicums (Tangkin, 2019). These findings provide insights that VC instructors should acquire and adapt the curriculum materials to meet instructional goals (Burkhauser and Lesaux, 2015).
Reflection on OBE in VCs aims to produce students with knowledge, skills and values. The following aspirations can be achieved by implementing PBA in teaching and learning using the GA method. It can be observed through alignment where curriculum, learning and teaching, and assessment are being practised constructively. The same goes for the rubric usage in assessing GA. Previous studies stated that GA is a complex and challenging task (Frykedal & Chiriac, 2016). Hence, instructors' practice in grading assignments through GA is crucial in understanding its challenges (Forsell et al., 2021). AAs have been designed in VC to understand what a student can do rather than what they know. Therefore, the rubric used by VC instructors to measure proficiency concerning knowledge application should bring out students' ability through designated projects, portfolios, and all kinds of activities. The learning and assessment process should be reviewed using a rubric for grading purposes to complete a meaningful assigned task, demonstrate students' skills through demonstrations, and bring out the knowledge gained as the outcomes.
The findings of this study also provide helpful input to stakeholders, in particular VTETD. Ongoing training should be implemented for all instructors to improve pedagogical and assessment practices. In addition, guidance should be provided through coaching and mentoring, where experienced instructors will guide new instructors. Furthermore, datadriven instruction, using accurate measurements, appropriate assessments, and in-depth evaluation such as AA and rubrics usage should change the way the instructors view the functions of assessment. Instructors who clearly understand how and why these issues are essential will find these changes give them a better understanding of their students and better opportunities to help them achieve academic success.

Conclusion
In conclusion, this study has been conducted to identify knowledge in rubric usage for GA among instructors in VC. The findings help VC reflect on the PBA and AA practices. Similarly, improvements to the practices (PBA, AA, rubrics) should be taken action as Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) to align with learning outcomes and compare common testing modalities. These changes necessitate implementing strategic support systems to engage students in the learning process. Hopefully, the findings of this study will inspire Vocational-Technical Education and Training Division to provide training in terms of quality teaching, best practice assessment, and professional support to the instructors. Placements of solid and competent instructors will help to ensure all VCs in Malaysia comply with the high-performance educational standards as prescribed by the Ministry of Education Malaysia.