Grading

Criteria:

Overall, the writing is clear, insightful, focused, well developed and organized, and enriched by well-chosen details and examples. It holds the reader's attention and moves the reader forward effortlessly. The writer demonstrates independent and original thinking.

Ideas flow logically and fluently; the thesis is clear, original, manageable, and apt; the analysis is compelling and sound. Each point is supported by at least one piece of reliable and accurate evidence. Quoted material is well integrated and correctly documented in the required style.

The language is precise, interesting, powerful, and engaging; sentences are well constructed, varied in length and structure, and joined by strong transitions.

The writer demonstrates a thorough grasp of standard English conventions (spelling, punctuation, grammar, usage, paragraphing, mechanics); there are no errors or only minor, mechanical errors.

The writing has many obvious strengths and no obvious need for revision.

Criteria:

Overall, the writing is clear, well developed, and supported by well-chosen details and examples. It holds the reader's attention and moves the reader forward smoothly. The writer demonstrates some independent and original thinking, although some parts of the writing may be predictable.

Ideas flow logically and fluently; the thesis is clear and appropriate to the topic, and the analysis is sound. Most points are supported by evidence. Quoted material is mostly well integrated and correctly documented in the required style.

The language is mostly precise, interesting, and engaging, although it may lack impact and originality; sentences are well constructed and varied in length and structure.

The writer demonstrates a good grasp of standard English conventions (spelling, punctuation, grammar, usage, paragraphing, mechanics); errors are few, mainly mechanical, and do not impede comprehension.

Strengths far outweigh weaknesses, although revisions can be suggested that would improve the writing.

Criteria:

Overall, the writing is clear but the development is basic or general; supporting details are present, but some are obvious or otherwise fail to bring depth to the topic. The writing follows a predictable structure that allows the reader to move through the text without much difficulty.

In places, ideas may wander and the flow of logic may not be clear to the reader. Some points lack supporting evidence, and some evidence or examples may be used inappropriately. Some quoted material may be poorly integrated and/or incorrectly documented, or it is unclear how it supports the argument. Overall coherence may be impaired in places by missing transitions or errors in logic.

The language is general, functional, and comprehensible, but has little impact or style. Sentence structure is basic but correct.

The writer demonstrates a reasonable grasp of standard English conventions (spelling, punctuation, grammar, usage, paragraphing, mechanics); however, the writing contains obvious errors, although few disrupt or impede comprehension.

Both weaknesses and strengths are evident, but strengths still outweigh weaknesses. Needed improvements are numerous and obvious.

Criteria:

Overall, the writing minimally meets the expectations of basic competency, but the writing lacks some or all of clarity, coherence, development, and focus; what supporting details are present are obvious or otherwise fail to bring depth to the topic. The writer demonstrates few insights and little independence of thought.

Ideas may be obvious or unclear, and often seem loosely connected to each other. The thesis may be difficult to identify or predictable. Some paragraphs lack coherence. Some topics wander, shift, or are left undeveloped. Some supporting evidence is lacking, weak, or incorrect. Some quoted material is poorly integrated, or it is unclear how it supports the argument. Some documentation may be lacking or incorrect.

The language is general, functional, and comprehensible, but has little impact or style. Sentence structure may be incorrect or simple and predictable.

The writer demonstrates a basic grasp of standard English conventions (spelling, punctuation, grammar, usage, paragraphing, mechanics), but the writing contains obvious errors, some of which disrupt or impede comprehension.

Strengths and weaknesses are roughly equal. Needed improvements are numerous and obvious.

Criteria:

The failing paper is characterized by a number of serious flaws, which may reflect the writer's lack of effort, comprehension, or fluency, or a combination of these deficiencies. The writing does not meet the expectations of competency as defined above.

Overall, the writing is poorly developed or unclear; it lacks a clear direction and forces the reader to infer connections between ideas. The writing is mechanical at best and lacking in detail or an obvious point of view.

The language is nonspecific, redundant, and often distracting; sentences may be correctly constructed, but the connections between ideas are missing or unclear.

Errors in spelling, punctuation, usage, grammar, paragraphing and mechanics consistently impede comprehension.

Weaknesses outweigh strengths.