Thesis is mostly defended well, but one small part isn’t supported, or one or two of the arguments for it need a bit more support or explanation
writing
Description
Ethics
Research Paper Rubric
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
(4) Outstanding |
(3) Good |
(2) Adequate |
(1) Inadequate |
|
S T R E N G T H O F A R G U M E N T |
ARGUMENT |
Thesis is supported excellently—the
arguments in the essay work well together to support the thesis; the claims
in these arguments are themselves supported well |
Thesis is mostly defended well, but one
small part isn’t supported, or one or two of the arguments for it need a bit
more support or explanation |
1-2 important parts of thesis need
further support (textual or other evidence), or several claims in the
arguments for the thesis given too quickly, w/little support |
The points given in the paper do not
support the thesis, or there are major gaps where aspects of the thesis or
arguments for it are left undefended, or
it’s difficult to tell what you are arguing for & how |
|
EVIDENCE |
Adequate textual evidence provided for
your claims about the text |
Adequate textual evidence provided for
your claims about the text(s) in most places, but need more in 1-2 places |
More textual evidence is needed in
several places |
Very little to no textual evidence is
provided |
|
|
ACCURACY |
No inaccuracies in discussion of texts,
&/or non-standard interpretations defended well |
Mostly accurate discussion of claims and
arguments from texts, but 1-2 minor inaccuracies; or, controversial or
non-standard interpretations of texts need a bit more defense |
A few inaccuracies in the discussion of
the texts, or controversial or non-standard interpretations of texts not
defended as well as they should be |
Many points in discussion of texts are
inaccurate, or controversial interpretations hardly or not defended at all |
|
|
I N S I G H T |
INSIGHT |
Creative, original thesis, argument, and
interpretations of texts that spark new ideas and questions in the reader
beyond what is in the texts and lectures; takes risks and reflects deep
thought and effort |
Thesis, arguments, &/or
interpretations of texts reflect some original thought, but could use more |
There is not much evidence of original
thought or interpretations, or the arguments in the essay focus on was given
in class or in the texts, or the interpretations are pretty clear to most
readers on a first read |
The essay attempts to repeat arguments
or ideas from texts or lectures/discussions, or attempts to give an original
argument, but shows a serious lack of understanding of the material in either
case |
|
|
|
(4) Outstanding |
3) Good |
(2) Adequate |
(1) Inadequate |
|
O R G A N I Z A T I O N |
THESIS |
Thesis
is clear and accurately reflects the main argument in the essay |
Thesis
statement is vague, or the essay argues something slightly different |
Thesis
is hard to find and/or difficult to understand |
There
seems to be no thesis statement at all |
|
ORDER |
Points
are linked in an order that reveals well how they work together to support
the thesis |
One
or two paragraphs should be moved to a different part of the essay to improve
the argument flow, or one paragraph goes a bit off topic |
It’s
somewhat difficult to follow the thread of the argument in the essay, to see
why the paragraphs should be in this order (though with effort the thread can
be found), or the essay makes some points disconnected from thesis |
Points
seem to be listed somewhat randomly rather than having clear transitions and
a logical order |
|
|
PARAGRAPHS |
Paragraphs
are coherent, with good topic sentences |
One
or two paragraphs could be better organized internally, or missing topic
sentences for 1-2 of them |
It’s
hard to follow the internal organizational structure of several paragraphs,
or several paragraphs missing topic sentences |
The
essay is not broken up into coherent paragraphs for different points |
|
|
S
Get Free Quote!
444 Experts Online
|
