Assessment rubrics seem to be a relevant solution when teachers and researchers have difficulties in assessing oral language effectively. However, the interpretation of the rubrics depends on the evaluator’s frame of reference. In this study, a comparison was made between a group of five teachers and a group of four researchers in the conception of two rubrics to assess pupils’ oral communication skills at the end of elementary school. The results of our qualitative analysis show that the difficulties, the ways of using the rubrics, the types of justifications and the solutions experimented by the two groups of professionals somewhat vary. Teachers opted for more grounded solutions, strongly linked to their experience and their classroom context. As for researchers, they had to make sure that the constructed rubric allows a precise measure of oral communication skills and had to question the structural organization of the rubric.