|
Trait
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
|
Ownership of Ideas/Personal Investment
|
Demonstrates a clear sense of ownership of student’s own text and ideas,
as well as strong personal investment in learning about the topic
through effective engagement with texts and a strong sense of inquiry.
Also through voice, creativity, style, and forceful prose.
|
Demonstrates a modest sense of ownership of student’s own text and
ideas, as well as some personal investment in learning about the topic
through effective engagement with texts and a strong sense of inquiry.
Also through voice, some creativity, style, and clear prose.
|
Demonstrates minimal sense of ownership of his or her own text and
ideas, as well as little personal investment in the learning process
about the topic through effective engagement with texts and little sense
of inquiry. Also through
uneven voice, little creativity, little style, and/or weak prose.
|
Demonstrates no sense of ownership of student’s own text and ideas, and
no personal investment in learning more about the topic.
Also through uneven voice, no creativity, little style, and weak
prose.
|
|
Critical Analysis of Text
|
Writer not only comprehends the author’s ideas and argument, connecting
the parts to understand the whole text, but interprets and expands the
ideas in light of her own thinking and questioning. This includes
appropriate contextual, structural, textual analysis, rhetorical, or
genre analysis.
|
Writer somewhat comprehends the author’s ideas and argument, connecting
the parts to understand the whole text, but interprets and expands it in
a limited fashion, not deeply engaging the text. This includes
some contextual, structural, textual, rhetorical, or genre
analysis.
|
Writer has a limited comprehension of the author’s ideas and argument,
not clearly distinguishing part to whole, and gives little personal
interpretation, engagingly the text only superficially. This
includes no real textual analysis..
|
Writer has a limited comprehension of the author’s ideas and argument,
showing no awareness of parts connecting to the whole text, and offers
almost no personal interpretation. This includes no real
textual analysis.
|
|
Coherent Extended Argument
|
This paper consistently develops a complex set of assertions that
support a specific idea, moving from an engaging question or problem to
its resolution, providing a pleasing organization and seamless
transitions.
|
This paper develops assertions that may be properly focused and resolved
yet are moderate with regard to complexity OR develops assertions that
are complex yet not entirely supported or focused in limited areas.
Organization and transitions are adequate.
|
This paper may have a clear focus and a few complex assertions at points
but as the paper unfolds this focus is either abandoned or becomes
confusing OR, the paper may start with no real focus and eventually hit
on an argument that (whether complex or not) is never developed
throughout. The paper’s organization is problematic and transitions are
not consistently effective.
|
This paper lacks any real focus and makes no overall claim, struggling
to navigate through assertions. It barely develops points throughout and
examines no question in any sustained depth. The paper may move from one
point to the next in a type of free-write pattern reaching no ultimate
resolution OR it may handle a simplistic topic in a repetitive fashion
and similarly come to no ultimate resolution.
The author provides no clear
organization and little guidance to the reader.
|
|
Integration of Outside Sources
|
Represents the supporting texts faithfully and concisely, using them to
further develop the author’s own argument while keeping her own argument
and voice central. Quote
incorporation is smooth, effective, and is always analyzed or elaborated
upon. Sources are cited correctly.
|
Represents texts faithfully if not concisely, generally using them to
further develop the author’s own argument while keeping her own argument
or voice central. Quote
incorporation is smooth and effective but may not be elaborated upon.
Sources are generally cited correctly.
|
Represents texts in ways that seem unclear, vague, or inaccurate.
May not choose sources to
support the author’s purpose or to further support her own argument.
Uses quotes too sporadically or drops source material into the
essay so as to make the argument difficult to follow.
Sources are often cited incorrectly.
|
Misrepresents and misinterprets texts.
Uses sources in ways that seem fairly arbitrary or unclear.
Texts do not further her own argument and are of no value to the
essay. Uses at most one
quotation, and drops source material with no further elaboration or
analysis. Sources are cited
incorrectly.
|
|
Follow MLA style.
|
Formats the document as a whole and sources in particular (both within
text and in the works cited page) with virtually no errors.
|
Formats the document as a whole and sources in particular (both within
text and in the works cited page) with some errors but not enough to
distract.
|
Formats the document as a whole and sources in particular (both within
text and in the works cited page) with many errors, though the student
demonstrate clear awareness of the need to follow MLA style.
|
Shows little awareness of MLA style either in formatting the document or
citing sources.
|
|
Following (academic) genre conventions
|
Uses appropriately formal language, and a clear and powerful style, and
makes choices based on an understanding of the genre; makes almost no
errors in usage, mechanics, or syntax.
|
Uses generally formal language, a fairly natural voice, and a clear and
concise style; makes some errors in usage, mechanics, or syntax but not
enough to distract.
|
Uses a mixture of formal and conversational language, a weak voice, and
a verbose or simplistic style; makes distracting errors in usage,
mechanics, or syntax.
|
Uses inappropriate language and an unnatural voice, and has no clear
style; the usage, mechanics, or syntax interfere with comprehension of
the text.
|
