Correctness is not understanding
Review a correct answer separately from evidence of independent understanding.
Features
More than an answer.
Evidence of understanding.
Separate mathematical correctness from learner understanding. Choose the help that matters. These are Rubric’s design principles.
Keep the original goal in view
Support the nearest prerequisite, then return to the learner’s chosen goal.
Verifiable mathematical criteria
Use code to check core answer and solution criteria within the supported problem range.
Staged hints, active checks
Ask learners to explain in their own words or predict the next step, rather than only read an explanation.
Independent use and delayed checks
Distinguish application on a new problem from understanding retained over time.
Concepts and evidence, kept separate
Keep the shared map of mathematical concepts distinct from each learner’s evidence of understanding.
Deeper AI review when needed
Check deterministic answers with code first and use AI review where meaning needs interpretation.
A way to revisit an answer
Plan for preserving answers during temporary review delays and letting learners request another review.
AI helps explain.
Understanding is checked.
A fluent explanation does not establish correctness or mastery. Our design considers mathematical criteria, the learner’s reasoning, and their independent application on a new problem.
Understanding,
one step forward.
Explore the learning Rubric is building.
About Rubric →