Assessment: Beyond the Artifact

No single rubric can capture every kind of multimodal work—and that flexibility is a strength.
Thoughtful assessment begins long before the final project and attends to the entire process of making, not just the polish of the final artifact. Each course, assignment, and student brings different goals and contexts. 
What stays constant is this: thoughtful assessment begins long before the final project is turned in. But here's what we know: When multimedia assignments are well-scaffolded and thoughtfully assessed, they really can become more than "tech projects." They're powerful opportunities for students to think differently, communicate more effectively, and engage more deeply with your course content.

Seeing the Whole Project

We are big fans of  Multimedia Assessment Project (MAP) framework since it provides a way to link the language of creation to the language of feedback. It also helps avoid the traps of many multimedia rubrics: overemphasizing polish or undertheorizing the work.  It can help you focus on the dimensions of thinking and growth most aligned with your learning goals and helps you decide what kinds of thinking and growth you want to notice. Think of them as prompts for designing your own assessment approach. Faculty have found this framework helpful to design assignments, shape feedback, and clarify learning goals.

1. Artifact

The artifact is the thing itself and reflects how effectively a student communicates meaning through a chosen medium. Attention focuses on clarity, coherence, structure, and intentional design.

Guiding questions:

• How clearly does the piece communicate its purpose?
• How do form and media choices support the message?
• What evidence suggests thoughtful revision and design decisions?

2. Context

Context includes audience, genre, platform, and purpose. Students demonstrate contextual awareness when their choices reflect where the work might circulate and how it may be received.

Guiding questions:

• Who is the intended audience?
• How does the piece engage genre expectations?
• How clearly does the student understand the rhetorical situation?

3. Substance

Substance reflects the quality of thinking and inquiry. It includes research depth, intellectual engagement, and the significance of ideas being communicated.

Guiding questions:

• How well-developed and meaningful are the ideas?
• How does the work engage research, evidence, or analysis?
• How does the project connect to course concepts?

4. Process Management and Technique

This domain attends to how students manage the work of making. It includes planning, iteration, collaboration, problem-solving, and developing control over tools and workflows.

Guiding questions:

• How did the student approach the complexity of the project?
• What tools or techniques supported their goals?
• What evidence shows iteration and response to feedback?

5. Habits of Mind

Habits of mind describe dispositions that support learning across projects and contexts. These include curiosity, persistence, ethical awareness, creative risk-taking, and openness to critique.

Guiding questions:

• What growth or self-awareness does the project reveal?
• How does the student respond to challenges?
• How does reflection demonstrate learning beyond the artifact?

Assessment That Supports Learning

When assessment reflects the full scope of student work, it supports agency and persistence. Students learn that making involves experimentation, revision, and judgment rather than surface polish alone.

Assessment grounded in these domains helps faculty see how students are thinking with a medium, engaging inquiry, and developing communication strategies that extend beyond a single assignment.

Connecting Assessment to Support

The Reeder Media Center can support faculty as they develop assessment approaches that reflect multimodal learning. Support includes:

• consultation on assignment and rubric design
• workshops on feedback strategies for multimodal work
• guidance on integrating reflection and process documentation