A midterm paper about novel

Essay Assessment Guidelines

Andrew Hebard

Grade

Argument

Organization

Evidence

Mechanics/Style

A

90-100

The paper has a focused, coherent argument that is consistently and fully developed. The paper knows what it wants to say and why it’s important (the “so what?” question). It presents a sophisticated analysis that goes beyond the obvious and changes the reader’s vision.

Every paragraph supports the main argument in a focused, unified, and logical way. Paragraphs are complete and well-developed. Introductions and conclusions uniquely support the argument. Clear transitions indicate why each new paragraph follows the preceding one.

Concrete, specific evidence supports general points. The paper provides the source and significance of each piece of evidence. Secondary sources are reputable. Documentation is correct and consistent.

The paper uses correct grammar and punctuation. It has been proofread as well as spellchecked. The language is precise, concise, lively, and well-suited to its purpose.

B

80-89

1) The paper has a solid, consistent argumentative focus, but it isn’t fully developed – it doesn’t quite know why it does what it does.

OR

2) The paper spells out the obvious; the presentation is focused, coherent, and solidly developed, but the thought has not been very deep.

The paper as a whole works in a logical way, but the paragraphs within it do not always follow a consistent logic or are not fully developed. Topic sentences and transitions are occasionally rough. Introductions and conclusions are perfunctory or repetitive.

The paper offers a mix of solid evidence and unsupported generalizations. It uses most evidence well but needs some more evidence or needs to clarify the significance of some of what’s already there. Evidence occasionally comes from questionable sources.

The paper contains occasional but limited errors in grammar and/or punctuation. It has been spellchecked but not proofread. The language sometimes lacks precision, concision, variety, or an appropriate tone, or it relies too much on jargon or the passive voice.

C

70-79

The paper includes some imaginative ideas that hint at a convincing and important thesis, but they are not yet working consistently and coherently as an argument.

The paper attempts to organize its points, but paragraphs are frequently unfocused. They lack topic sentences, contain multiple topics, or are overlong and rambling. This is often a symptom of a problem with argument, as the framing of the paper has not provided a clear path for the structure of evidence. Transitions are rare.

The paper offers very little concrete evidence, instead relying on plot summary, generalities, or bald assertions of opinion. If concrete evidence is present, its origin or significance is not clear.

The paper contains frequent errors in grammar and/or punctuation. The language is often vague, inconsistent, repetitive, or inappropriate.

D

60-69

The paper has a general topic rather than an argument, giving a series of related observations without suggesting a logic for their presentation or a reason for presenting them (pattern identification).

The paper’s points are listed rather than organized, and some of them do not appear to belong to the paper at all.

The paper offers no concrete evidence from its sources or misuses a little evidence.

The paper contains consistent and basic errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation. The language is vague, inconsistent, repetitive, or inappropriate.

F

0-59

1) The paper lacks even a consistent topic, providing a series of largely unrelated observations. OR

2) The paper fails to meet the parameters of the assignment.

The paper loses the reader. Both paper and paragraphs lack coherence.

The paper uses plagiarized or inapplicable evidence.

The paper contains consistent and glaring mechanical errors. The syntax is relatively unintelligible.