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.  Ownership is indicated via voice and creativity where student uses a voice that feels authentically his or her own, and uses a style that is clear and even powerful at times. Presents the topic in a fresh, sophisticated, even clever, way.   Asserts his or her ideas in clear, 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.  Ownership is indicated via voice and creativity where student has a voice that seems fairly natural, and uses a style that is clear.  Presents the topic in a somewhat interesting, and unique, manner.   Shows ability to assert his or her own ideas with clear, if not forceful, 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.  Ownership is indicated via voice and creativity where  student has a voice that may sometimes seem strained or flaccid, and uses a style that is sometimes verbose or overly simplistic.

Demonstrates no sense of ownership of student’s own text and ideas, and no personal investment in learning more about the topic.  Ownership is indicated via voice and creativity where the student presents well-rehearsed discussion of the topic using little, if any, of student’s own thinking.  Student does not demonstrate a use of his or her own voice as it feels unnatural at times. May quote texts but does not engage with them or demonstrate a sense of inquiry.  

Critical Analysis of Text

Writer not only comprehends the author’s ideas and argument but interprets and expands them in light of her own thinking. This includes (as appropriate for the assignment), careful textual analysis based upon awareness of historical and cultural context, the relationship of structure to meaning, genre expectations in fiction and nonfiction, and rhetorical strategies. Writer is able form connections between different parts of a text to demonstrate a good understanding of the whole text. Engages with, questions, and challenges the author’s ideas and argument to assert her own claims.

Writer somewhat comprehends the author’s ideas and argument but interprets and expands it in a limited fashion.  This includes (as appropriate for the assignment), some textual analysis based upon awareness of historical and cultural context, the relationship of structure to meaning, genre expectations in fiction and nonfiction, and rhetorical strategies. Writer forms some connection between different parts of the text and demonstrates a general understanding of the whole text.  Writer somewhat engages with the author’s ideas/argument, but there is not much questioning or challenging of the author’s claims. 

Writer has a limited comprehension of the author’s ideas and argument and gives little personal interpretation.  This includes (as appropriate for the assignment), limited textual analysis based upon awareness of historical and cultural context, the relationship of structure to meaning, genre expectations in fiction and nonfiction, and rhetorical strategies. Writer makes few connections among parts of the text and demonstrates minimal understanding of the whole text.  Writer has limited engagement with the author’s ideas/argument, rarely questions or challenges the author’s claims, and mostly summarizes the text's general argument.

Writer has a almost no comprehension of the author’s ideas and argument and has little personal interpretation.  This includes (as appropriate for the assignment), no real textual analysis based upon awareness of historical and cultural context, the relationship of structure to meaning, genre expectations in fiction and nonfiction, and rhetorical strategies. Writer make no clear connections among parts of the text and demonstrates little understanding of the whole text.  Writer show very little engagement with the author’s ideas/argument, rarely questions or challenges the author’s claims, and only inadequately summarizes the text's general argument.

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.  The argument demonstrates complex critical thinking, is structured in a way that provides clear organization, and utilizes transitions seamlessly. Writer demonstrates awareness of various potential audience's positions within the argument while navigating through purposefully chosen and well-analyzed textual evidence.

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. The argument demonstrates a clear knowledge of structure and organization and ultimately moves the paper to some point of resolution, but perhaps limited sections are not entirely well executed. The writer demonstrates adequate ability for critical thinking. The paper uses adequate transitions. The writer demonstrates audience awareness for most, if not all, of the paper. Writer moves toward, but does not complete, navigation of well-analyzed and purposefully chosen textual evidence.

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 structure may work at points but overall, this paper’s organization is problematic, largely because the argument (or thesis) itself is not entirely focused. Writer demonstrates little or almost no critical thinking within the argument. Audience becomes lost or shifted, and conclusion may reflect lack of movement in the course of the argument. This paper may be inconsistent with transitions, bring in apparently unrelated material or not enough material and overall, remains too simplistic with regard to supporting textual analysis.

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. This author appears to have no real grasp on structure and organization, largely because there is no argument to build upon. Paper exhibits an absence of critical thinking. Transitions may exist at points on a local level but are not consistent and do not serve any larger structural motive. This paper may confuse the reader by leaving out textual support or by bringing in apparently unrelated material and awareness of audience may be insufficient.

Integration of Outside Sources

Represents the supporting texts faithfully and concisely.  Does not misrepresent or misinterpret the text. Uses the texts as a way to further develop her own argument, instead of reiterating the author’s ideas. and is able to do this while still keeping their own argument central.  Quote incorporation is smooth, effective, and is always analyzed and elaborated upon. All sources are correctly cited in the text as well as works cited page.

Represents texts faithfully if not concisely.  Does not misrepresent or misinterpret the text.  Clearly tries to further develop her own argument, without reiterating the author’s ideas.  Is able to do this, while keeping her own argument or voice somewhat central.  Quote incorporation is smooth and effective but may not be elaborated upon.  Sources are generally cited correctly in the text as well as works cited page.

Represents texts in ways that seem unclear or vague.  May misrepresent or misinterpret the text.  May not demonstrate the ability to choose sources to with clear purpose.   Does not necessarily use the text as evidence 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 cited incorrectly in the text as well as the works cited page.

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.  There is no attention to the reader’s needs.  Sources are cited incorrectly in the text as well as the works cited page.

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.