Math Rubric Builder

Build a math rubric that assesses problem-solving, mathematical reasoning, and communication alongside procedural accuracy, giving students feedback on how they think, not just whether they got the right answer.

MathElementary (K–5)Middle School (6–8)High School (9–12)

Get the Complete Toolkit

  • Structured PDF with guiding questions per section
  • Print-friendly layout, works on screen or paper
  • Includes Flip's pedagogical notes and tips
4.6|150+ downloads

When to use this template

  • Problem-solving tasks and performance assessments in math
  • When you want to assess mathematical reasoning alongside procedural accuracy
  • Open-ended math tasks with multiple solution paths
  • Any math assessment where you want students to explain their thinking
  • Formative and summative assessment of mathematical communication

Template sections

Describe the math task and identify the primary mathematical goals.

Task type (procedural practice, problem-solving, application, explanation):

Grade and standards:

Primary mathematical skills assessed:

Is this formative or summative?

Choose the criteria that match your task and learning goals.

Conceptual understanding (yes/no): [describe what this means for your task]

Procedural accuracy (yes/no):

Problem-solving approach (yes/no):

Mathematical reasoning (yes/no):

Mathematical communication (yes/no):

Weighting of each criterion:

Write descriptors for each criterion at each performance level, anchored in what mathematical work actually looks like.

Conceptual Understanding:

Level 4: [what strong conceptual understanding looks like]

Level 3: [meets standard]

Level 2: [approaching]

Level 1: [beginning]

(repeat for each criterion)

Define what mathematical communication (written explanations, diagrams, notation) looks like at each level.

What forms of mathematical communication are expected (words, diagrams, equations, models)?

Level 4 communication:

Level 3 communication:

Level 2 communication:

Level 1 communication:

Define the scoring structure and how the rubric will be applied.

Point values per criterion:

Total score and grade conversion:

How to handle correct answer via incorrect method:

How to handle incorrect answer via correct method:

Self-assessment component?

The Flip Perspective

Math rubrics that only count correct answers miss the learning. Assessing reasoning, approach, and communication alongside accuracy gives students a more accurate picture of their mathematical understanding and gives you better information for instruction. This builder helps you design criteria that reward thinking, not just answer-getting.

See what our AI builds

Adapting this Template

For Math

Use the Math Rubric structure to frame problem-solving sequences, letting students work through examples before formalizing procedures.

About the Math Rubric framework

Math rubrics that only assess whether students got the right answer miss most of what mathematical learning looks like. A student who uses an incorrect procedure and gets lucky with the right answer demonstrates less understanding than a student who uses sound reasoning and makes a small computational error. A well-designed math rubric assesses the full picture.

What math rubrics should assess: Conceptual understanding (does the student show they know why the procedure works?), procedural accuracy (did they execute the algorithm correctly?), problem-solving approach (did they choose an appropriate strategy?), mathematical reasoning (is the logic sound?), and mathematical communication (did they explain their thinking clearly?). Not every task requires all five dimensions. A good rubric selects the criteria that match the learning goals.

The reasoning problem in math assessment: Many math teachers inadvertently train students to hide their thinking because they know that showing work reveals errors. A good math rubric reverses this incentive: reasoning and communication are assessed separately from accuracy, so showing thinking and explaining reasoning earns credit even when the final answer is wrong.

Problem-solving assessment: When assessing problem-solving tasks (rather than routine practice), the rubric should assess the quality of the approach (did the student understand the problem, select a reasonable strategy, and make progress toward a solution?) separately from whether they reached the correct answer.

Mathematical communication: Math is a language. Students should be able to explain their reasoning in words, diagrams, and symbolic notation. A math rubric that includes a communication criterion sends the message that explanation matters and teaches students that mathematics is not just computation.

Grade-level calibration: What constitutes "strong reasoning" looks different in Grade 3 versus Grade 11. This builder includes guidance for calibrating criteria to grade-appropriate expectations.

Analytic Rubric

Build an analytic rubric that evaluates student work across multiple criteria with distinct performance levels, giving students specific, actionable feedback on exactly what they did well and what to improve.

Self-Assessment Rubric

Design rubrics students use to assess their own work and learning, building metacognitive skills, encouraging honest reflection, and creating a genuine feedback loop between student self-perception and teacher assessment.

Math Unit

Plan a multi-week math unit with conceptual coherence: from building number sense and procedural fluency to applying skills in context and developing mathematical reasoning across a connected sequence of lessons.

Experience the magic of Active Learning

Want a ready-to-teach lesson, not just a template?

Our AI takes your subject, grade, and topic and builds a ready-to-teach lesson with step-by-step instructions, discussion questions, an exit ticket, and printable student materials.

Try it free

Frequently asked questions

This is exactly why you have separate criteria for reasoning and accuracy. Award full credit for reasoning if it is sound, and note the computational error in the accuracy criterion. The student may lose accuracy points but should not lose reasoning points for a small computational mistake with valid mathematical thinking.
Three to four levels works well. With four levels, you distinguish between students who exceed, meet, approach, and are just beginning. With three levels, you distinguish between exceeds/meets, approaching, and beginning. Choose based on how much diagnostic specificity you need.
Anchor descriptors in mathematical behavior you can observe: "Student selects an appropriate strategy (lists, diagrams, equations, or guess-and-check) and applies it correctly to reach the right answer" is more useful than "Student uses good problem-solving strategies." The observable behaviors make scoring more consistent.
Yes, and specifically discuss what "mathematical reasoning" and "communication" look like. Students often do not realize that explanation is expected and valued. Showing a few examples of strong mathematical communication before the task significantly improves what students produce.
For regular formative use, simplify to 2–3 criteria and use a 3-point scale. Reserve the full analytic rubric for major summative tasks. Even a short formative checklist (Did I explain my thinking? Did I check my work? Did I label my answer?) creates habits that improve quality.
Active learning in math means students are reasoning, debating strategies, and explaining their thinking to peers, not just completing practice problems silently. A math rubric designed for active learning should include criteria for mathematical communication and collaborative problem-solving alongside procedural accuracy. When students work through a Flip mission that involves a real-world math challenge, you can observe how they approach problems, justify their strategies, and build on each other's reasoning. This rubric gives you the structure to evaluate those skills, and Flip missions give students the hands-on context that makes mathematical thinking visible.
← All lesson plan templatesExplore active learning methodologies →