|
Writing Rubric |
(I am) Superman |
Stairway to Heaven |
Ball of Confusion |
Highway to Hell |
|
Critical Thinking Analysis Synthesis Evaluation Interpretation Insight Resolution of conflicting ideas or information
|
Skillfully explores the complexity of the issues |
Explores the complexity of the issues |
Superficially or inadequately recognizes the complexity of the issues |
Does not recognize the complexity of the issues |
|
Skillfully recognizes and discusses conflicting ideas, interpretations or sources |
Recognizes and discusses conflicting ideas, interpretations or sources |
Superficially or inadequately discusses conflicting ideas, interpretations or sources |
Does not discusses conflicting ideas, interpretations or sources |
|
|
Displays evidence of insightful critical textual analysis (implicit as well as explicit) |
Displays some evidence of critical textual analysis but lacks depth of understanding |
Displays superficial or limited understanding of text, more descriptive than analytic; Relies on summary or opinion instead of analysis; Ineffectively synthesizes the information; Forms limited conclusions based on limited examination of information |
Demonstrates inadequate or inaccurate understanding of the text; Attempts at analysis or insight are confused or inappropriate or non-existent; Demonstrates major errors in understanding |
|
|
Develops a truly original idea that provokes the reader to think |
Displays some original thinking |
Lacks evidence of original thinking |
Demonstrates no original thinking |
|
|
Develops ideas completely to form a unified whole; Sustains control over a thesis/controlling idea |
Develops ideas to form a unified whole
|
Develops superficial, inappropriate or unsuccessful connections among ideas |
Develops no connections among ideas |
|
|
Thesis or controlling idea is sharply focused, arguable, and well-developed |
Thesis or controlling idea is consistent and controlled but may not be as focused, arguable, and well-developed as those in top category |
Thesis or controlling idea is limited, confused, partially developed, and/or not arguable, and only addresses the issues somewhat |
Thesis (if appropriate) is nonexistent or irrelevant |
|
|
Content Mastery Evidence: § Details, nuances, and subtleties § Elaboration |
Demonstrates sophisticated, accurate and insightful use of evidence; |
Demonstrates accurate use of evidence; |
Demonstrates only sketchy or insufficient use evidence |
Demonstrates almost no use of evidence; |
|
Skillfully demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of details, nuance, subtleties and ambiguities of the content |
Demonstrates accurate understanding of details, nuances and subtleties of the content |
May have content errors
|
Uses confused or inappropriate evidence
|
|
|
Elaborates and develops ideas with rich and substantive evidence, balancing shorter examples with more extended anecdotes; Primary and secondary ideas are developed in proportion to their significance |
Utilizes appropriate evidence and elaboration but does not balance the types of examples with the same sophistication as those in the top category |
Shows some understanding of details, nuances and subtleties of the content; Lacks ability to elaborate and develop ideas; Relies on vague, oversimplifications rather than in-depth subject knowledge; may have minor errors. |
Contains major content errors; Shows insufficient understanding of or makes no effort to understand details, nuances and subtleties of the content |
|
|
Presentation of Work
Organization § Clarity § Fluency Transitions Personal Voice and Style: § rhetorical devices such as repetition, transition, emphasis, control of tone, and the achievement of emphasis through parallelism and antithesis § Knowledge of Audience § Tone Language Specific to Purpose Grammar, Mechanics and Usage: § Subject-verb agreement; run on sentences; fragments, pronoun case errors; comma use; pronoun-Antecedents; verb tense, active and passive voice; Dangling and misplace modifiers; usage and confusables; parallel structure § Sentence construction
|
Demonstrates logical organization where each paragraph enlarging and deepening the meaning or central idea; organization may or may not be conventional; Shows exceptional clarity and fluency |
Demonstrates logical organization but lacks the sophistication of those devices used in the top category; Shows clarity and fluency |
Demonstrates acceptable organization; Shows some clarity and fluency |
Disorganized; Demonstrates a lack of clarity and fluency; Writes in an unclear and choppy manner |
|
Transitions work well; Skillfully blends quotations |
Transitions are obvious or generic; Blends quotations |
Transitions and blending of quotations are Inconsistent or awkward |
No transitions; Does not blend quotations |
|
|
Exhibits personal voice and style because the writer knows the effect language has on their audience; The personality of the writer is evident; the writer’s enthusiasm and/or interest brings the topic to life; the writing is natural and compelling; the tone is appropriate and consistently controlled; the overall effect is individualistic, expressive, and engaging; includes the language specific to purpose |
Exhibits personal voice and style but lacks the sophistication of those devices used in the top category |
False and forced voice; generic style because hasn’t yet developed the strategies necessary; does not take their audience into consideration |
Lacks personal voice and style |
|
|
Follows appropriate style guide (e.g. MLA) |
Follows appropriate style guide; sometimes lacks accuracy |
You managed to get your name in the right place… |
Style guide? Wa zat? |
|
|
Consistently applies rules of grammar, mechanics and usage accurately |
Consistently applies most rules of grammar, mechanics and usage; still learning |
Lacking experience with or knowledge of rules of grammar, mechanics and usage evidenced by frequent errors |
Ignores or is ignorant of rules of grammar, mechanics and usage |