question

Exceeding the Standard

Meeting the Standard

Approaching the Standard

Below the Standard

Depth

Do questions call for higher order thinking (analysis, application, evaluations, creativity)?

· All four questions demonstrate higher-order thinking (analysis, evaluation, synthesis, creativity) and require thoughtful responses.

Most questions (3 of 4) demonstrate higher-order thinking.

Some questions (1–2) show limited higher-order thinking; others are surface-level.

Questions rely on recall or simple understanding with no analytical depth.

Value

How valuable would answering these questions be for a deep understanding of the text?

· All questions promote deep understanding of the text and connect meaningfully to key ideas or arguments.

· Most questions promote deep understanding and relate well to the text.

· Some questions encourage limited reflection or connection to key ideas.

· Questions fail to promote critical engagement with the text.

Specificity

Are questions clear and specific?

· All questions use precise language, are clearly written, and reference specific passages or ideas from the text.

· Most questions are clear and refer to specific text ideas.

· Questions are somewhat vague or general; limited textual connection.

· Questions are unclear, overly broad, or unrelated to the text.

Mechanics

Are questions well-written and grammatically correct?

All questions are grammatically correct, well-structured, and free of spelling or punctuation errors.

Minor (1–2) errors that do not interfere with understanding.

Several (3–4) errors that somewhat affect clarity.

Frequent (5+) errors that interfere with readability or meaning.

Exceeding the Standard

Meeting the Standard

Approaching the Standard

Below the Standard

Content

· Addresses all questions thoroughly and insightfully.

· Demonstrates deep understanding of Brighouse’s arguments.

· Responses show strong reasoning with clear concrete connections, between the text and analysis.

· Makes insightful personal connections, with clear examples and implications for teaching.

· Addresses all questions clearly.

· Demonstrates adequate understanding of Brighouse’s arguments.

· Responses show logical reasoning with some supporting evidence.

· Makes clear personal connections, with some examples and implications for teaching

· Addresses most questions but with limited depth.

· Demonstrates partial or superficial understanding of Brighouse’s arguments.

· Lacks consistent evidence or reasoning.

· Includes limited examples and personal reflection and vague connections to classroom implications for teaching.

· Addresses few questions or in minimal detail.

· Demonstrates little understanding of Brighouse’s ideas or reasoning.

· Reflection is minimal.

· Lacks personal or practical application of ideas.

Organization

· Demonstrates clear, logical progression of ideas.

· Strong introduction, body, and conclusion with smooth transitions.

· Notable sense of voice.

· Demonstrates a logical structure with identifiable introduction, body, and conclusion.

· Transitions are mostly clear.

· Distinct sense of voice.

· Organization is apparent – but may be choppy or uneven. (Introduction, body and conclusion are basic).

· Basic sense of voice.

· Organization is unclear.

· Lacks clear structure.

· Ideas appear disjointed or confusing.

Mechanics

· Writing is fluent and polished with no grammatical, punctuation or spelling errors.

· Writing contains minor errors (1-2) that do not interfere with meaning.

· Writing contains several errors (3-4) that occasionally interfere meaning.

· Writing contains frequent errors (5+) that interfere with meaning.

APA Format

· APA format followed precisely with no errors.

· APA format accurately and consistently with 1-2 minor errors.

· APA format attempted with multiple errors; 3-4.

· APA format not followed; contains 5+ significant errors.