A: Superior

• Performs the assignment fluidly and elegantly, integrating all required components;

• The argument goes significantly beyond surface-level reporting to provide original comparison or analysis;

• The structure shows intentional design and thoughtful selection of focus; it moves purposefully between summary and response; there is clear direction at all levels;

• The piece is carefully researched to sustain a focused argument; all included research is

necessary and carefully integrated into the author's original language;

• The writing displays a tone appropriate with the chosen genre and consistent across the

entirety of the piece

• Ably performs complex tasks like integrating quotations, paraphrasing difficult ideas, or synthesizing multiple perspectives;

• Sentence-level mechanics display superior control of diction, syntactic variety, and transition; uses Chicago or MLA-style in-text citations and Works Cited

B: Strong

• Performs the assignment fluidly, integrating all required components;

• The argument often goes beyond surface-level reporting to provide original comparison or analysis;

• The structure shows intentional design and thoughtful selection of focus; it moves purposefully between summary and response; there are only minor lapses where the direction isn't clear;

• The piece is adequately researched to sustain a focused argument; most research included is necessary and carefully integrated into the author's original language;

• The writing displays a tone appropriate with the chosen genre which is consistent across the

entirety of the piece; there may be small lapses and inconsistencies in the voice either between paragraphs or within single paragraphs;

• Performs complex tasks like integrating quotations, paraphrasing difficult ideas, or synthesizing multiple perspectives;

• Sentence-level mechanics display competent control of diction, syntactic variety, and transition; uses Chicago or MLA-style in-text citations and Works Cited; may have a few minor flaws

C: Competent

• Performs the assignment, integrating most required components;

• The argument attempts to go beyond surface-level reporting to provide original comparison or analysis; remains mostly on the level of cliché or surface-level thinking;

• Structure shows intentional design, but the design may be disjointed or not fully unified; some sections may not clearly integrate with the piece’s overall purpose;

• The piece is researched to the minimum degree to sustain a focused argument; author at least attempts to integrate research into her argument in a purposeful way;

• Ideas are presented without textual evidence and/or textual evidence has citation problems;

• Tone, purpose, and voice are consistent across paragraphs, but perhaps not across the entire piece;

• May attempt to perform complex tasks like integrating quotations, paraphrasing difficult ideas, or synthesizing multiple perspectives, with some difficulty

• Demonstrates minimum level of competency at sentence-level mechanics, but perhaps not a high level of inventiveness or experimentation with syntax or vocabulary; uses Chicago or MLA-style in-text citations and/or Works Cited with some difficulty.

D: Weak

• Performs the assignment without sufficient care and without all required components;

• May simply report on material of others without contributing original argument, reasoning, analysis, or imagination; does not move beyond cliché or ask difficult questions of the reader;

• May show no real design or thoughtful selection in the overall structure; may address multiple issues, but does not seek to integrate them into a whole;

• May lack sufficient research to sustain the discussion; quotations and paraphrases for the most part lack context or reflection;

• May display inconsistent tone, direction, or purpose, even within single paragraphs; write

either sounds consistently unsure of herself or seems to be writing for no real purpose;

• Does not perform complex tasks like integrating quotations, paraphrasing difficult ideas, or synthesizing multiple perspectives into a single statement;

• May show patterns of flaws in language, syntax, or mechanics; may show significant problems with Chicago or MLA in-text citations and/or Works Cited

F: Inadequate

• Does not perform the assignment

• Demonstrates serious inadequacy in one or more of the areas specified for a D paper

• Shows no substantial understanding of chosen topic;

• May be deliberately off-topic or inappropriate to the assignment;

• Is so incompletely developed as to demonstrate no competence at analysis or writing mechanics; lacks Chicago or MLA in-text citations and/or Works Cited