Grade Range

Intro.

Generates interest and excitement as to the essay. Defines essential terms and considerations. Stresses importance and relevance of topic.

General information that provides an invitation into the text.

Well-intended but rhetorically ineffective: (see http://www.unc.edu/ depts/wcweb/ handouts/ introductions.htm for more information).

Underdeveloped, broad, or vague. Appears to function as a placeholder for essay.

Thesis

Defines topic, commentary (terms of analysis), and order of essay clearly and succinctly (within one sentence)

Defines topic, commentary (terms of analysis), clearly and succinctly (within one sentence)

Sets topic and commentary within one or more sentences. May be general or vague.

Thesis is unstated or assumed within context of several sentences.

Body

Well-developed analysis that progresses logically. Demonstrates careful and close reading and consideration. For ‘nuts and bolts,’ each section works with a mini-thesis, each paragraph has a clear topic sentence. The work is interesting and original.

Analysis is logical, and it is effectively presented. Generally defined sections with broad-focus paragraphs.

Primarily an opinion with supporting texts. Organization may be unclear. Points are broadly presented in a manner that points to a superficial reading/ consideration.

Primarily a reporting of others’ information. Poorly and/or ineffectively organized.

Sources

Sources used represent peer-reviewed scholarship or other works appropriate for college-level work (within context). Sources are effectively used in a variety of ways (quoting, paraphrasing, summarizing), yet the paper is primarily an original work of scholarship. The sources effectively support the writer’s analysis. Totality of source is recognized (e.g., scholarship is respected and worked with in context)

Generally good sources used appropriately and meaningfully in discussion. Some cases of over-reliance on sources (primarily using one or two sources or “over-quoting”).

Sources are o.k. for college-level work. Relationship between sources and analysis is at times unclear (or over-stressed). Analysis may develop “source by source” rather than by points of argument that integrate sources in order to demonstrate.

Insufficient sources or inappropriate for college-level scholarship. Heavy reliance on quotation / direct phrasing, to the extent that the writing is more of a compilation than an original written work. Sources are quoted out of context or in ways that misrepresent the focus of the original work.

Concl.

Provides reader with a strong sense of purpose in relationship to the preceding essay. Effectively and persuasively responds to the reader’s unstated, “so what?”

Restates thesis and reiterates essay. Develops a sense of “going beyond” the confines of the writing.

Simply restates thesis and reiterates essay. Vague or clichéd.

May restate general topic. Purpose unclear. Underdeveloped.

Gramm.

Expressive and precise vocabulary. Few (if any) errors. No proofing errors.

Minor grammatical errors. Vocabulary is appropriate. Few (if any) proofing errors.

Some usage errors. Vocabulary is basic but correct. Some proofing errors.

Obvious proofing (typographical) errors. Many grammatical errors. Vocabulary and/or tone inappropriate for college-level work.

Doc.

Follows MLA precisely. Precise use of signal phrases. Relationship between in-text citations and WC is clear.

Minor punctuation errors with MLA; signal phrases generally clear.

General formatting errors. Citation format appears to be based on MLA.

Sources are misspelled or differently spelled throughout text; citation format does not follow MLA