Philosophy

stack1
CW1Assignment.pdf

The Critical Writing Assignment 1

Due at the end of Module Three. For this assignment, please make sure to analyze and discuss one (and only one!) of the following two classical arguments for the existence of God:

1. St. Anselm’s Ontological Argument 2. Clarke’s Cosmological Argument

You may argue either for or against the soundness of the argument, but you must take up and defend a specific position. Make sure to submit the Critical Writing Assignment 1 no later than Sunday 11:59 PM EST/EDT. (This Dropbox basket is linked to Turnitin.)

PHI 110RS Critical Writing Assignment Guidelines & Rubric

There will be two (2) critical writing assignments. Topics for each writing assignment are in Module 3 (Assignment 1) and Module 6 (Assignment 2). Some generic requirements to be observed for all Writing Assignments include that all papers must:

 Defend a thesis and should proceed according to the following format: Thesis, Argument, Objection(s), Response(s), Conclusion

 Include citations to the primary required class readings. These and any additional sources must be properly cited using MLA format.

 Fall within the following length requirements: 1200-1500 words.

 Use a standard 10-12 pt. font and be double spaced. Critical Writing Assignments 1 and 2 are due no later than Sunday 11:59 PM EST/EDT of Modules 3 and 6 respectively. (These Dropbox baskets are linked to Turnitin.) Information on MLA Citation style can be found here: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/ SEE RUBRIC ON NEXT PAGE

TOTAL: ___ / 120

Elements

Criteria

Score

Not Attempted (Criterion is

missing or not in evidence)

0-11.99%

Novice (does not meet expectations;

performance is substandard) 12-13.99%

Basic (works towards

meeting expectations; performance needs

improvement) 14-15.99%

Proficient (meets expectations;

performance is satisfactory)

16-17.99%

Exemplary (exceeds expectations;

performance is outstanding)

18-20%

Paper Topic 16.66%

Paper contains no thesis and/or

does not address the

essay prompt.

Thesis is difficult to discern and/or fails to address multiple parts of

the essay prompt.

Thesis is discernible, but not explicitly

stated in introductory paragraph and/or

addresses most, but not all, of parts of the

essay prompt.

Thesis statement is present in introductory

paragraph, but it is wordy, generic or unclear and/or paper addresses all parts of the essay prompt, but

not adequately.

Thesis statement is present in introductory

paragraph. It is concise, articulate, and narrowly

focused. Paper adequately addresses all parts of the essay prompt.

__/20

Length Requirements

16.66%

There was little or no evidence of a complete assignment.

Paper is entirely too short.

Paper contains a great deal of “fluff”

and still doesn’t meet the length

requirements

Paper is on the short side or meets requirements

only because it contains “fluff.”

Paper falls within the required length

requirements without going off topic.

__/20

Mechanics of Writing 16.66%

Little to no evidence of

proper writing mechanics.

The grammar of the paper greatly

impedes understanding of

content. Organizational

structure is unclear.

Paper needs a good deal of improvement

with respect to grammar, spelling,

and/or style. Organization and/or flow of ideas need

improvement.

Paper is mostly free of errors with respect to

grammar, spelling, and/or style, but needs some

improvement. Organizational structure

is adequate.

Paper is nearly perfect with respect to grammar,

spelling, and style. Organizational structure is clear and the paper

flows nicely.

__/20

Conceptual Analysis & Thoughtful

Engagement 16.66%

Paper exhibits a complete lack of

thoughtful engagement with

the text. Concepts are

identified, but not clearly defined. No attempt to

elaborate/ exemplify.

Paper exhibits very little thoughtful

engagement with the text. Few concepts are

clearly defined using elaboration/ exemplification.

Paper exhibits basic engagement with text,

but needs improvement. Some concepts are clearly

defined using elaboration/

exemplification,

Paper exhibits thoughtful understanding of the text, but some improvement needed. Most concepts are clearly defined using

elaboration/ exemplification.

Paper does an excellent job demonstrating an

accurate understanding of the text and goes beyond

mere summary. All relevant concepts are

clearly defined using elaboration/

exemplification.

__/20

Points of View/ Consideration of Objections

16.66%

Paper does not acknowledge the

existence of alternative points

of view. Does not state

objections to thesis.

Acknowledges existence of more than point of view, but does not clear

articulate a specific objection

and respond.

Acknowledges existence of more

than point of view, but considers only one.

States a specific objection to thesis, but makes no clear attempt to respond.

Acknowledges existence of more than point of

view. States at least one objection to thesis and responds, but needs some improvement.

Acknowledges existence of more than point of

view. Clearly and articulately states at least

one objection to thesis and then adequately

responds to the objection.

__/20

MLA Style/Citations

16.66%

Paper lacks both in-text citations and a proper

works cited list.

Paper lacks either in-text citations or

a proper works cited list, but not

both.

Paper contains in-text citations and a works cited list, but does not

follow MLA style.

Paper contains in-text citations and a works cited list, but several

stylistic errors are present.

Paper contains proper in- text citations and a works

cited list. Few stylistic errors are present.

__/20