grading rubric
Nov 29th, 2009 by Sara Koopman
Grading rubric for final paper, as developed by the UC Santa Barbara English Department
| Content | Organization | ¶ Development | Style | Correctness | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | Response to topic is insightful and original. Essay reflects depth of thought. Excellent analysis of reading is evident. | Thesis is well-focused. Paragraph sequence is logical; transitions clarify relationships of ideas. Introduction is engaging; conclusion is substantive. | Paragraphs are unified and coherent. Ideas are well-developed with significant and persuasive evidence. Relevant quotes are skillfully integrated. | Sentences are skillfully constructed, varied, and distinctive. Diction is fresh and precise. | Consistent use of standard grammar, punctuation, and spelling. |
| B | Response to topic is thoughtful, and purpose is clear. Close reading is evident. | Thesis is focused. Sequence of paragraphs is logical; transitions are generally smooth. Intro is informative; conclusion goes beyond summary. | Paragraphs are unified and coherent. Ideas are developed with effective evidence and support. Quotes are generally relevant and well integrated. | Sentences are generally concise, varied, and fluent. | Few deviations from standard grammar, punctuation, and spelling. |
| C | Response to topic is appropriate but needs more sustained thinking. Essay is not fully developed. Analysis of reading is superficial. | Thesis is evident, but may need sharper focus. Organization is apparent but not consistent. Transitions are lacking. Intro and/or conclusion may be weak. | Paragraphs are generally developed but have occasional lapses in coherence or unity. Some ideas may be underdeveloped; some key points may need support. Adequate attempt is made to incorporate quotes. | Sentences are appropriate but may show little complexity or variety and some awkwardness. Diction is generally clear and idiomatic with occasional vague or inappropriate wording. | Occasional comma splices, fragments, misspellings, or other errors. |
| D | Topic is addressed inadequately. Ideas lack development. Understanding of reading is not demonstrated. | Thesis is weak. Organization is haphazard; paragraph breaks are illogical. Some paragraphs are repetitive or irrelevant. Intro and conclusion are weak. | Paragraphs lack coherence and are often short. Ideas are overly generalized, ramble, and lack supporting details. Quotes are insufficient, excessive, or inaccurate. | Awkward sentences obscure train of thought. Diction is vague, repetitive, incorrect, unidiomatic. Excessive slang. | Repeated comma splices, fragments, and other serious errors. |
| F | Inappropriate topic. Unacceptable length. Little thought evident. | No thesis. No plan or organization evident. | Short, undeveloped paragraphs. No transitions. Incoherence. Quotes are inappropriate, inaccurate, or absent. | Awkward sentences obscure train of thought. Diction is vague, repetitive, incorrect, unidiomatic. Excessive slang. | Serious deviations. |