Category

3

2

1

0

Score

Content

Covers topic in depth with details and examples. // Subject knowledge is excellent. // No errors.

Includes essential knowledge about the topic. // Subject knowledge is good. // Few or no errors.

Includes basic information about the topic. // May be several factual errors.

Content is minimal. // Multiple factual errors.

Evaluation

Fully answers question. //Uses logical critical thinking to assess information. // Effectively uses specific examples to support analysis. // Evaluates alternative perspectives (e.g., personal v. social effects).

Mostly answers question. //Few gaps in logical assessment. //

Limited use of specific examples to support analysis. //

Evaluates some alternative perspectives (e.g., personal v. social effects).

Partially answers question. // Large gaps in logical assessment. // Few specific examples used to support analysis. // Evaluates minimal alternative perspectives (e.g., personal v. social effects).

Does not answer question. // No logical assessment of information. // No specific examples used to support analysis. // Does not evaluate alternative perspectives (e.g., personal v. social effects).

Conclusion

Conclusions or opinions clearly stated. // Conclusions clearly based on sound evidence & evaluation.

Conclusions or opinions are present. // Conclusions based on persuasive evidence & evaluation.

Conclusions or opinions irresolute. // Conclusions based on some evidence & evaluation.

No conclusions or opinions stated. // Conclusions based on superficial evidence. // Little or no evaluation in evidence.

Organization

Thesis is clear and well developed. // Content is well organized. // Logic is easy to follow, with flowing transitions.

Thesis is present. // Content is well organized. // Logic is comprehensible.

Thesis is unclear or poorly developed. // Content is poorly organized. //  Poor transitions between ideas.

No clear or logical organizational structure. // Difficult to understand.

Structure

Sentences and paragraphs are logical and coherent. // Writing consistently professional. // Quotations are seamlessly integrated.

Sentences and paragraphs are coherent. // Writing is professional; occasionally awkward. // Acceptable use of quotations.

Sentences and paragraphs lack structure or focus. // Awkward writing tone. // Quotations interfere with flow of ideas.

Disorganized sentences and paragraphs. // Informal writing tone. // Quotations interrupt flow of ideas.

Sources

Source information provided for all ideas, facts and quotes. //

Sources support author's points. //

Appropriate variety of sources.

Source information provided for most ideas, facts and quotes. //

Sources support author's points. // Appropriate variety of sources.

Source information provided for some ideas, facts and quotes. //

Sources somewhat support author's points. //

More/greater variety of sources should be used.

Very little or no source information provided. //

Inappropriate sources used. //

Sources do not support author's points.

Mechanics

No misspellings or grammatical errors.

Some misspellings and/or mechanical errors. // Errors do not substantially interfere with communication.

Frequent misspellings and/or grammatical errors. //

Errors interfere with communication.