Assignment Two
Grading Rubric for Writing with a Purpose
Using Evidence
|
||||||
Letter Grades |
Conceptual |
Rhetorical |
Argument |
Development and Support |
Structuring |
Language |
A |
has cogent analysis, shows command of
interpretive and conceptual tasks required by assignment and course
materials: ideas original, often insightful, going beyond ideas discussed in
lecture and class |
commands attention with a convincing argument
with a compelling purpose; highly responsive to the demands of a specific
writing situation; sophisticated use of conventions of academic
discipline and genre; anticipates the reader's needs for information,
explanation, and context |
|
well-chosen examples; uses persuasive
reasoning to develop and support thesis consistently; uses specific
quotations, statistics, aesthetic details, or citations of scholarly sources
effectively; logical connections between ideas are evident |
well-constructed paragraphs; appropriate,
clear and smooth transitions; arrangement of organizational elements seems
particularly apt |
uses sophisticated sentences effectively;
usually chooses words aptly; observes professional conventions of written
English and manuscript format; makes few minor or technical errors |
B |
shows a good understanding of the texts,
ideas and methods of the assignment; goes beyond the obvious; may have one
minor factual or conceptual inconsistency |
addresses audience with a thoughtful argument
with a clear purpose; responds directly to the demands of a specific writing
situation; competent use of the conventions of academic discipline and genre;
addresses the reader's needs for information, explanation, and context |
clear, specific, arguable central claims;
may have left minor terms undefined |
pursues explanation and proof of thesis
consistently; develops a main argument with explicit major points with
appropriate textual evidence and supporting detail |
distinct units of thought in paragraphs
controlled by specific, detailed, and arguable topic sentences; clear
transitions between developed, cohering, and logically arranged paragraphs |
a few mechanical difficulties or
stylistic problems (which/that use, split infinitives, dangling modifiers,
etc.); may make occasional problematic word choices or syntax errors; a few
spelling or punctuation errors or a cliche; usually
presents quotations effectively, using appropriate format |
C |
shows an understanding of the basic ideas
and information involved in the assignment; may have some factual,
interpretive, or conceptual errors |
presents an adequate response the essay
prompt; pays attention to the basic elements of the writing situation; shows
sufficient competence in the conventions of academic discipline and genre;
signals the importance of the reader's needs for information, explanation, and
context |
general thesis or controlling idea; may not
define several central terms |
only partially develops the argument;
shallow analysis; some ideas and generalizations undeveloped or unsupported;
makes limited use of textual or visual evidence; fails to integrate
quotations appropriately |
some awkward transitions; some brief,
weakly unified or undeveloped paragraphs; arrangement may not appear entirely
natural; contains extraneous information |
more frequent wordiness; unclear or
awkward sentences; imprecise use of words or over-reliance on passive voice;
some distracting grammatical errors (wrong verb tense, pronoun agreement,
apostrophe errors, singular/plural errors, article use, preposition use,
comma splice, etc.); makes effort to present quotations accurately |
D |
shows inadequate command of course
materials or has significant factual and conceptual errors; confuses some
significant ideas |
shows serious weaknesses in addressing an
audience; unresponsive to the specific writing situation; poor articulation
of purpose; often states the obvious or the inappropriate |
argument vague; central terms not defined |
frequently only narrates; digresses from one
topic to another without developing ideas or terms; makes insufficient or
awkward use of textual or visual evidence; relies on too few or the wrong
type of sources |
simplistic, tends to narrate or merely
summarize; wanders from one topic to another; illogical arrangement of ideas |
some major grammatical or proofreading
errors (subject-verb agreement, sentence fragments, word form errors, etc.);
language frequently weakened by colloquialisms, clich_s, repeated
inexact word choices; incorrect quotation or citation format |
F |
writer lacks critical understanding of
lectures, readings, discussions, or assignments |
shows severe difficulties communicating |
no discernible argument |
little or no development; may list
disjointed facts or misinformation; uses no quotations or fails to cite
sources or plagiarizes |
no transitions; incoherent paragraphs;
suggests poor planning or no serious revision |
numerous grammatical errors and stylistic
problems seriously detract from the argument; does not meet Standard Written
English requirement |