Scribd
Upload
8K views

Rubric

Uploaded by

api-250532716
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
8K views

Rubric

Uploaded by

api-250532716
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Philosophy Writing Assignment RubricInstructor: Aaron Griffith

Grade

Conceptual Accuracy and Argumentation

Thesis

Development and Support

Structuring

Language and Style

All terms defined correctly; all views, ideas, and arguments stated charitably and accurately in students own words; logical connections between ideas are correct and clear; shows deep understanding of context and rationale of views and arguments

Essay controlled by clear, precise, welldefined thesis; is sophisticated in both formulation and insight

Exposition, interpretation, and argumentation are detailed and thorough; logical connections between ideas are evident; uses persuasive reasoning to develop and support thesis consistently; uses examples, quotations, and citations of scholarly sources effectively

Essay is streamlined; has well-constructed paragraphs; appropriate, clear, and smooth transitions; arrangement of organizational elements seems particularly apt

Clear and thoughtful articulation of ideas; uses sophisticated sentences effectively; chooses words aptly; observes professional conventions of written English and manuscript format; makes few minor or technical errors; avoids jargon and defines all technical terms

All terms defined correctly; shows a good understanding of the texts, ideas and arguments; goes beyond the obvious; may have minor factual or conceptual inconsistencies

Clear, specific, arguable thesis central to the essay; 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; exposition, interpretation, and argumentation are sufficiently detailed

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 (split infinitives, dangling modifiers, etc.); may make occasional problematic word choices or syntax errors; a few spelling or punctuation errors or a clich; usually presents quotations effectively, using appropriate format

Shows an understanding of the basic ideas, arguments, and context involved in the assignment; may not define all terms; dependent on original wording; may have some factual, interpretive, or conceptual errors

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 evidence; fails to integrate quotations appropriately; assertions are made with little to no support or rationale

Some awkward transitions; some brief, weakly unified or undeveloped paragraphs; arrangement may not appear or entirely natural; contains extraneous information; tends to be repetitive

More frequent wordiness; unclear or awkward sentences; imprecise use of words; 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

Shows inadequate command of ideas and arguments; key terms not defined; has significant factual and conceptual errors

Thesis vague or not central to argument; central terms not defined

Ideas and arguments not explained or developed; digresses from one topic to another; bald assertions made with no rationale; makes insufficient or awkward use of textual evidence; relies on too few or the wrong type of sources; key questions or ideas barely addressed or not at all Little or no development; may list disjointed facts or misinformation; uses no quotations or fails to cite sources or plagiarizes; key questions or ideas not addressed

Little discernable structure; repetitive and 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 clichs, colloquialisms, repeated inexact word choices; incorrect quotation or citation format

Misinterprets or lacks understanding of key ideas, arguments, texts, and assignment

No discernible thesis

Disorganized and repetitive; 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 academic and especially philosophical standards

STUDENT NAME:

GRADE:

You might also like