I need this by Thursday
Myprideandjoy3
Assignment1-Compareandcontrast.pdf
https://youtu.be/SnJTHrNuB3M
Assignment Guide: The Compare/Contrast Essay
Assignment Prompt For this assignment, you will be writing a compare/contrast essay–an exploratory piece of writing in which you attempt to show readers how two topics are similar, different, or a combination of the two: both similar and different. Whether you focus exclusively on comparing, exclusively on contrasting, or a mix of both, is totally up to you. However, regardless of which approach you decide to take, you will want to include a strong thesis/claim statement, at least three effective supporting points, and a streamlined point-by-point organizational strategy.
Assignment-Specific Requirements:
Length: This assignment should be at least 750 words.
Thesis: Underline your thesis statement or the main claim of your essay.
Sources Needed: Two reliable and credible sources are required for this assignment. Be sure to use MLA guidelines for all in-text and Works Cited citations.
Page Formatting: See Appendix C - Formatting and Submitting Your Work
MLA Requirements: See Formatting your Essay: MLA 8th Edition
First Name Last Name Course Name Assignment Type/Draft # Date (In MLA Format)
Title of Essay Begin introduction paragraph….
Rhetorical Mode
Compare/contrast essays are both creative and analytical in nature. They are typically more formal than a personal narrative in the sense that they are written from a third-person perspective, where a writer is not injecting their own opinion directly using “I” or “me” language.
To prove points–compare/contrast essays rely on researched evidence, and not personal opinion or experience, per se. When you choose two topics, you will have numerous options for comparing and contrasting them–much more than you can actually use in a single paper. Therefore, you will need to decide what elements are worth comparing and contrasting, and why. This is the seek and discover part of the essay, but also the creative part. For example, another writer may choose the same two topics as you, but their essay may rest entirely on thesis and supporting points. When you limit your supporting points to those points you think you can prove most effectively, you are maximizing your creative and analytical writing abilities.
Rhetorical Considerations
Purpose:
Remember that this is an exploratory paper: The piece of writing should show readers, through the inclusion of careful detail and specifics, and strong supporting points, how your two topics are similar, different, or a combination of the two: similar and different.
Audience:
The compare/contrast essay is written for someone else–either a single reader or a community of readers. When choosing the points you want to use to show readers that your topics are similar, different, or a combination of the two, you should keep this audience in mind, making sure that you are choosing the most effective points possible to show how your two topics are similar or different.
In this instance, you are writing to show readers that your two topics are similar, different, or a combination of the two (similar and different). Keep this audience in mind by emphasizing the compare/contrast claims throughout the essay.
Form:
This is a formal writing project, written in third-person, relying on strong organizational strategies, integrating researched evidence, and following MLA formatting guidelines.
Six Features of a Compare and Contrast Essay
1 Compare/Contrast Thesis: Contains a strong and succinct thesis/claim statement that outlines whether the two topics are similar, different, or a combination of the two, and at least three supporting points that can boost that claim. A sample compare/contrast thesis might look like this:
Although curriculum A and curriculum B are similar in their student success goals, they are very different when it comes to their structure, topics, and scoring.
2 Transitions: Utilizes transitional words and phrases that help the audience (or reader) move more easily from idea to idea, sentence to sentence, and paragraph to paragraph.
1 *Note–transitions do not only occur in topic sentences but throughout the essay. When you are moving from one idea to the next, whether between two sentences or between two paragraphs, you will want to include language that can help bridge your ideas (and sentences/paragraphs). Some examples might be “in addition to,” “next.”
3 Compare/Contrast Signals: In addition to more typical transitional words and phrases, this essay should also include compare/contrast specific signals, emphasizing for readers how and why your topics are alike or different. Here are some example:
1 similar: in addition, by comparison, similarly
2 different: however, in contrast, differing from
4 Point-by-Point Organizational Strategy: The essay should follow the point-by-point approach to showcase the use of transitions, synthesize your own supporting points with researched evidence, and build a fully developed essay with an introduction, several body paragraphs, and a conclusion. For this kind of organization, you will create a topic sentence
for each body paragraph that outlines a compare/contrast point regarding both topics and use the body paragraph to show readers how your two topics are similar, different, or similar and different.
5 Reliable and Credible Sources: The essay should integrate at least two reliable and credible sources (also known as “scholarly sources”) to help prove the compare/contrast claims to readers and to boost or substantiate the supporting points that you have created for your two topics.
Proofreading and Revising: As with any writing project, the final draft of this essay should be carefully reviewed for clarity and correctness. This includes checking word choice, sentence structure, organization, transitions/coherence, and MLA formatting.
Need assignment ideas?
Take a look at this valuable resource from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Writing Center: Topic Ideas
Grading Guide: The Compare/Contrast Essay
ENG 101 Rubric: Compare/Contrast Essay
Points
0-1
Points
2
Points
3
Points
4
Points
5
Intr odu ctio n
(Fir st Par agr aph )
20 %
Ope ning “ho ok”
Bac kgro und Info rmat ion
Expl icit The sis
Spe cific Sup porti ng Poi nts
The openin g “hook” is not presen t. The thesis does not contai n a clear compa re/ contra st thesis and/or severa l specifi c suppor ting points. The writer’ s aware ness of the audien ce is not appar ent.
The openin g “hook” is not appar ent. The compa re/ contra st thesis and/or the suppor ting points are hard to discer n; the author' s aware ness of the audien ce is difficul t to ascert ain.
The openin g “hook” is attemp ted, but it may/ may not be succe ssfully engagi ng. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are eviden t, though they may lack strengt h; it loosel y prepar es the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” is presen t and may/ may not enhan ce the reader ’s interes t in the materi al. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are presen t, and both prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” grabs the reader ’s attenti on. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are strong and clear, and they though tfully prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
Ess ay Dev elo pm ent (Bo dy Par agr aph s)
20 %
Foll ows the topi c- by- topi c app roac h
Incl ude s clea r tran sitio ns
Use s com par e and cont rast sign als
Inte grat es rese arch ed evid enc e
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. The essay lacks compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are lackin g or ineffec tive. Resea rch is not integra ted at all.
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. Little to no attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted but ineffec tive. Resea rch is integra ted poorly, if at all.
The essay attemp ts the topic- by- topic appro ach, but it is ineffec tive. Some attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Some attenti on is paid to transiti onal phrase s, but further attenti on is requir ed. Resea rched eviden ce is attemp ted, but not succe ssfully integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay may/ may not attemp t a topic- by- topic appro ach. Effort is made to includ e compa re/ contra st singla s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted and mostly succe ssful. Resea rched eviden ce is includ ed, but could be better integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay succe eds with a topic- by- topic appro ach. Comp are/ contra st signal s are strong and appro priate. Transit ional phrase s are presen t throug hout the essay. Resea rched eviden ce is expertl y woven into the essay with origina l insight .
Clo sin g (Co ncl usi on Par agr aph ) 20 %
Incl ude s a remi nde r of the expl icit thes is and sup porti ng poin ts.
Mak es a dire ct atte mpt to eng age the audi enc e.
Doe s not intro duc e new idea s/ clai ms
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. There is no attemp t to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. Little to no attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph attemp ts to remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points, though improv ement is possib le. Some attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims may be presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. An attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time, though some improv ement is possib le. New ideas/ claims are not presen ted.
The conclu sion paragr aph though tfully remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. A final attemp t at audien ce engag ement is attemp ted. No new ideas/ claims are presen ted.
Lan gua ge and Styl e 13.3 %
Sen tenc e Stru ctur e (Gra mm ar)
Wor d Cho ice/ Voc abul ary (Re dun dan cy, rep etiti on, awk war dne ss)
The writer has given very little or no appar ent consid eration to langua ge and style. Word choice is sloppy and/or incorre ct.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style dimini shes the nature and strengt h of the essay. Writer’ s langua ge/ style choice s make the essay less cohesi ve and/or difficul t to unders tand.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style, at times, deters from his/ her/ their overall argum ent. The writer’ s word choice and style someti mes detract s from the overall messa ge.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style helps conve y the author’ s point(s ). The writer almost always uses langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style accent uates the nature of the essay. Writer wields langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
Pun ctu atio n, Cap itali zati on 13.3 %
Co mm a erro rs, com ma spli ces, apo stro phe erro rs, capi taliz atio n erro rs, sem icol on erro rs, colo n erro rs, typo s/ mis spel ling s
Contai ns more than 6 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors.
The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout.
The errors help to signific antly deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns many (more than 4) differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors are repeat ed throug hout.
The errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns more than 3 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout. At times, the errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns 1-2 types of punctu ation/ capital ization errors, which may be repeat ed throug hout the essay. The errors do not deter from the writer’ s overall narrati ve, but they serve as a distrac tion.
Contai ns either no punctu ation/ capital ization errors, or no more than 2 differe nt errors with no repetiti on, and/or the errors do not deter from the writer’ s narrati ve.
Atte ntio n to Dire ctio ns/ For mat 13.4 %
Ess ay For matt ing req uire men ts, as note d for the cour se.
Doesn ’t meet format ting and/or word count requir ement s, and as a result, the writing is difficul t to read or unrea dable.
Meets very few format ting requir ement s, and those missin g deter from the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets some format ting requir ement s: the lack of appro priate format ting may lead to a lack of reada bility or to a distrac tion while readin g.
Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets most format ting requir ement s; the format ting does not discou rage reada bility. Word count minim um is met.
Meets all of the sugge sted essay format ting requir ement s; format ting enhan ces the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um is met.
ENG 101 Rubric: Compare/Contrast Essay
Points
0-1
Points
2
Points
3
Points
4
Points
5
Intr odu ctio n
(Fir st Par agr aph )
20 %
Ope ning “ho ok”
Bac kgro und Info rmat ion
Expl icit The sis
Spe cific Sup porti ng Poi nts
The openin g “hook” is not presen t. The thesis does not contai n a clear compa re/ contra st thesis and/or severa l specifi c suppor ting points. The writer’ s aware ness of the audien ce is not appar ent.
The openin g “hook” is not appar ent. The compa re/ contra st thesis and/or the suppor ting points are hard to discer n; the author' s aware ness of the audien ce is difficul t to ascert ain.
The openin g “hook” is attemp ted, but it may/ may not be succe ssfully engagi ng. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are eviden t, though they may lack strengt h; it loosel y prepar es the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” is presen t and may/ may not enhan ce the reader ’s interes t in the materi al. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are presen t, and both prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” grabs the reader ’s attenti on. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are strong and clear, and they though tfully prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
Ess ay Dev elo pm ent (Bo dy Par agr aph s)
20 %
Foll ows the topi c- by- topi c app roac h
Incl ude s clea r tran sitio ns
Use s com par e and cont rast sign als
Inte grat es rese arch ed evid enc e
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. The essay lacks compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are lackin g or ineffec tive. Resea rch is not integra ted at all.
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. Little to no attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted but ineffec tive. Resea rch is integra ted poorly, if at all.
The essay attemp ts the topic- by- topic appro ach, but it is ineffec tive. Some attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Some attenti on is paid to transiti onal phrase s, but further attenti on is requir ed. Resea rched eviden ce is attemp ted, but not succe ssfully integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay may/ may not attemp t a topic- by- topic appro ach. Effort is made to includ e compa re/ contra st singla s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted and mostly succe ssful. Resea rched eviden ce is includ ed, but could be better integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay succe eds with a topic- by- topic appro ach. Comp are/ contra st signal s are strong and appro priate. Transit ional phrase s are presen t throug hout the essay. Resea rched eviden ce is expertl y woven into the essay with origina l insight .
Clo sin g (Co ncl usi on Par agr aph ) 20 %
Incl ude s a remi nde r of the expl icit thes is and sup porti ng poin ts.
Mak es a dire ct atte mpt to eng age the audi enc e.
Doe s not intro duc e new idea s/ clai ms
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. There is no attemp t to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. Little to no attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph attemp ts to remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points, though improv ement is possib le. Some attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims may be presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. An attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time, though some improv ement is possib le. New ideas/ claims are not presen ted.
The conclu sion paragr aph though tfully remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. A final attemp t at audien ce engag ement is attemp ted. No new ideas/ claims are presen ted.
Lan gua ge and Styl e 13.3 %
Sen tenc e Stru ctur e (Gra mm ar)
Wor d Cho ice/ Voc abul ary (Re dun dan cy, rep etiti on, awk war dne ss)
The writer has given very little or no appar ent consid eration to langua ge and style. Word choice is sloppy and/or incorre ct.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style dimini shes the nature and strengt h of the essay. Writer’ s langua ge/ style choice s make the essay less cohesi ve and/or difficul t to unders tand.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style, at times, deters from his/ her/ their overall argum ent. The writer’ s word choice and style someti mes detract s from the overall messa ge.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style helps conve y the author’ s point(s ). The writer almost always uses langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style accent uates the nature of the essay. Writer wields langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
Pun ctu atio n, Cap itali zati on 13.3 %
Co mm a erro rs, com ma spli ces, apo stro phe erro rs, capi taliz atio n erro rs, sem icol on erro rs, colo n erro rs, typo s/ mis spel ling s
Contai ns more than 6 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors.
The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout.
The errors help to signific antly deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns many (more than 4) differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors are repeat ed throug hout.
The errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns more than 3 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout. At times, the errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns 1-2 types of punctu ation/ capital ization errors, which may be repeat ed throug hout the essay. The errors do not deter from the writer’ s overall narrati ve, but they serve as a distrac tion.
Contai ns either no punctu ation/ capital ization errors, or no more than 2 differe nt errors with no repetiti on, and/or the errors do not deter from the writer’ s narrati ve.
Atte ntio n to Dire ctio ns/ For mat 13.4 %
Ess ay For matt ing req uire men ts, as note d for the cour se.
Doesn ’t meet format ting and/or word count requir ement s, and as a result, the writing is difficul t to read or unrea dable.
Meets very few format ting requir ement s, and those missin g deter from the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets some format ting requir ement s: the lack of appro priate format ting may lead to a lack of reada bility or to a distrac tion while readin g.
Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets most format ting requir ement s; the format ting does not discou rage reada bility. Word count minim um is met.
Meets all of the sugge sted essay format ting requir ement s; format ting enhan ces the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um is met.
ENG 101 Rubric: Compare/Contrast Essay
Points
0-1
Points
2
Points
3
Points
4
Points
5
Intr odu ctio n
(Fir st Par agr aph )
20 %
Ope ning “ho ok”
Bac kgro und Info rmat ion
Expl icit The sis
Spe cific Sup porti ng Poi nts
The openin g “hook” is not presen t. The thesis does not contai n a clear compa re/ contra st thesis and/or severa l specifi c suppor ting points. The writer’ s aware ness of the audien ce is not appar ent.
The openin g “hook” is not appar ent. The compa re/ contra st thesis and/or the suppor ting points are hard to discer n; the author' s aware ness of the audien ce is difficul t to ascert ain.
The openin g “hook” is attemp ted, but it may/ may not be succe ssfully engagi ng. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are eviden t, though they may lack strengt h; it loosel y prepar es the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” is presen t and may/ may not enhan ce the reader ’s interes t in the materi al. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are presen t, and both prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” grabs the reader ’s attenti on. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are strong and clear, and they though tfully prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
Ess ay Dev elo pm ent (Bo dy Par agr aph s)
20 %
Foll ows the topi c- by- topi c app roac h
Incl ude s clea r tran sitio ns
Use s com par e and cont rast sign als
Inte grat es rese arch ed evid enc e
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. The essay lacks compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are lackin g or ineffec tive. Resea rch is not integra ted at all.
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. Little to no attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted but ineffec tive. Resea rch is integra ted poorly, if at all.
The essay attemp ts the topic- by- topic appro ach, but it is ineffec tive. Some attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Some attenti on is paid to transiti onal phrase s, but further attenti on is requir ed. Resea rched eviden ce is attemp ted, but not succe ssfully integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay may/ may not attemp t a topic- by- topic appro ach. Effort is made to includ e compa re/ contra st singla s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted and mostly succe ssful. Resea rched eviden ce is includ ed, but could be better integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay succe eds with a topic- by- topic appro ach. Comp are/ contra st signal s are strong and appro priate. Transit ional phrase s are presen t throug hout the essay. Resea rched eviden ce is expertl y woven into the essay with origina l insight .
Clo sin g (Co ncl usi on Par agr aph ) 20 %
Incl ude s a remi nde r of the expl icit thes is and sup porti ng poin ts.
Mak es a dire ct atte mpt to eng age the audi enc e.
Doe s not intro duc e new idea s/ clai ms
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. There is no attemp t to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. Little to no attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph attemp ts to remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points, though improv ement is possib le. Some attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims may be presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. An attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time, though some improv ement is possib le. New ideas/ claims are not presen ted.
The conclu sion paragr aph though tfully remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. A final attemp t at audien ce engag ement is attemp ted. No new ideas/ claims are presen ted.
Lan gua ge and Styl e 13.3 %
Sen tenc e Stru ctur e (Gra mm ar)
Wor d Cho ice/ Voc abul ary (Re dun dan cy, rep etiti on, awk war dne ss)
The writer has given very little or no appar ent consid eration to langua ge and style. Word choice is sloppy and/or incorre ct.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style dimini shes the nature and strengt h of the essay. Writer’ s langua ge/ style choice s make the essay less cohesi ve and/or difficul t to unders tand.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style, at times, deters from his/ her/ their overall argum ent. The writer’ s word choice and style someti mes detract s from the overall messa ge.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style helps conve y the author’ s point(s ). The writer almost always uses langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style accent uates the nature of the essay. Writer wields langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
Pun ctu atio n, Cap itali zati on 13.3 %
Co mm a erro rs, com ma spli ces, apo stro phe erro rs, capi taliz atio n erro rs, sem icol on erro rs, colo n erro rs, typo s/ mis spel ling s
Contai ns more than 6 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors.
The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout.
The errors help to signific antly deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns many (more than 4) differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors are repeat ed throug hout.
The errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns more than 3 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout. At times, the errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns 1-2 types of punctu ation/ capital ization errors, which may be repeat ed throug hout the essay. The errors do not deter from the writer’ s overall narrati ve, but they serve as a distrac tion.
Contai ns either no punctu ation/ capital ization errors, or no more than 2 differe nt errors with no repetiti on, and/or the errors do not deter from the writer’ s narrati ve.
Atte ntio n to Dire ctio ns/ For mat 13.4 %
Ess ay For matt ing req uire men ts, as note d for the cour se.
Doesn ’t meet format ting and/or word count requir ement s, and as a result, the writing is difficul t to read or unrea dable.
Meets very few format ting requir ement s, and those missin g deter from the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets some format ting requir ement s: the lack of appro priate format ting may lead to a lack of reada bility or to a distrac tion while readin g.
Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets most format ting requir ement s; the format ting does not discou rage reada bility. Word count minim um is met.
Meets all of the sugge sted essay format ting requir ement s; format ting enhan ces the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um is met.
ENG 101 Rubric: Compare/Contrast Essay
Points
0-1
Points
2
Points
3
Points
4
Points
5
Intr odu ctio n
(Fir st Par agr aph )
20 %
Ope ning “ho ok”
Bac kgro und Info rmat ion
Expl icit The sis
Spe cific Sup porti ng Poi nts
The openin g “hook” is not presen t. The thesis does not contai n a clear compa re/ contra st thesis and/or severa l specifi c suppor ting points. The writer’ s aware ness of the audien ce is not appar ent.
The openin g “hook” is not appar ent. The compa re/ contra st thesis and/or the suppor ting points are hard to discer n; the author' s aware ness of the audien ce is difficul t to ascert ain.
The openin g “hook” is attemp ted, but it may/ may not be succe ssfully engagi ng. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are eviden t, though they may lack strengt h; it loosel y prepar es the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” is presen t and may/ may not enhan ce the reader ’s interes t in the materi al. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are presen t, and both prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” grabs the reader ’s attenti on. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are strong and clear, and they though tfully prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
Ess ay Dev elo pm ent (Bo dy Par agr aph s)
20 %
Foll ows the topi c- by- topi c app roac h
Incl ude s clea r tran sitio ns
Use s com par e and cont rast sign als
Inte grat es rese arch ed evid enc e
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. The essay lacks compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are lackin g or ineffec tive. Resea rch is not integra ted at all.
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. Little to no attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted but ineffec tive. Resea rch is integra ted poorly, if at all.
The essay attemp ts the topic- by- topic appro ach, but it is ineffec tive. Some attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Some attenti on is paid to transiti onal phrase s, but further attenti on is requir ed. Resea rched eviden ce is attemp ted, but not succe ssfully integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay may/ may not attemp t a topic- by- topic appro ach. Effort is made to includ e compa re/ contra st singla s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted and mostly succe ssful. Resea rched eviden ce is includ ed, but could be better integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay succe eds with a topic- by- topic appro ach. Comp are/ contra st signal s are strong and appro priate. Transit ional phrase s are presen t throug hout the essay. Resea rched eviden ce is expertl y woven into the essay with origina l insight .
Clo sin g (Co ncl usi on Par agr aph ) 20 %
Incl ude s a remi nde r of the expl icit thes is and sup porti ng poin ts.
Mak es a dire ct atte mpt to eng age the audi enc e.
Doe s not intro duc e new idea s/ clai ms
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. There is no attemp t to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. Little to no attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph attemp ts to remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points, though improv ement is possib le. Some attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims may be presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. An attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time, though some improv ement is possib le. New ideas/ claims are not presen ted.
The conclu sion paragr aph though tfully remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. A final attemp t at audien ce engag ement is attemp ted. No new ideas/ claims are presen ted.
Lan gua ge and Styl e 13.3 %
Sen tenc e Stru ctur e (Gra mm ar)
Wor d Cho ice/ Voc abul ary (Re dun dan cy, rep etiti on, awk war dne ss)
The writer has given very little or no appar ent consid eration to langua ge and style. Word choice is sloppy and/or incorre ct.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style dimini shes the nature and strengt h of the essay. Writer’ s langua ge/ style choice s make the essay less cohesi ve and/or difficul t to unders tand.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style, at times, deters from his/ her/ their overall argum ent. The writer’ s word choice and style someti mes detract s from the overall messa ge.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style helps conve y the author’ s point(s ). The writer almost always uses langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style accent uates the nature of the essay. Writer wields langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
Pun ctu atio n, Cap itali zati on 13.3 %
Co mm a erro rs, com ma spli ces, apo stro phe erro rs, capi taliz atio n erro rs, sem icol on erro rs, colo n erro rs, typo s/ mis spel ling s
Contai ns more than 6 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors.
The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout.
The errors help to signific antly deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns many (more than 4) differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors are repeat ed throug hout.
The errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns more than 3 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout. At times, the errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns 1-2 types of punctu ation/ capital ization errors, which may be repeat ed throug hout the essay. The errors do not deter from the writer’ s overall narrati ve, but they serve as a distrac tion.
Contai ns either no punctu ation/ capital ization errors, or no more than 2 differe nt errors with no repetiti on, and/or the errors do not deter from the writer’ s narrati ve.
Atte ntio n to Dire ctio ns/ For mat 13.4 %
Ess ay For matt ing req uire men ts, as note d for the cour se.
Doesn ’t meet format ting and/or word count requir ement s, and as a result, the writing is difficul t to read or unrea dable.
Meets very few format ting requir ement s, and those missin g deter from the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets some format ting requir ement s: the lack of appro priate format ting may lead to a lack of reada bility or to a distrac tion while readin g.
Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets most format ting requir ement s; the format ting does not discou rage reada bility. Word count minim um is met.
Meets all of the sugge sted essay format ting requir ement s; format ting enhan ces the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um is met.
ENG 101 Rubric: Compare/Contrast Essay
Points
0-1
Points
2
Points
3
Points
4
Points
5
Intr odu ctio n
(Fir st Par agr aph )
20 %
Ope ning “ho ok”
Bac kgro und Info rmat ion
Expl icit The sis
Spe cific Sup porti ng Poi nts
The openin g “hook” is not presen t. The thesis does not contai n a clear compa re/ contra st thesis and/or severa l specifi c suppor ting points. The writer’ s aware ness of the audien ce is not appar ent.
The openin g “hook” is not appar ent. The compa re/ contra st thesis and/or the suppor ting points are hard to discer n; the author' s aware ness of the audien ce is difficul t to ascert ain.
The openin g “hook” is attemp ted, but it may/ may not be succe ssfully engagi ng. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are eviden t, though they may lack strengt h; it loosel y prepar es the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” is presen t and may/ may not enhan ce the reader ’s interes t in the materi al. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are presen t, and both prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” grabs the reader ’s attenti on. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are strong and clear, and they though tfully prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
Ess ay Dev elo pm ent (Bo dy Par agr aph s)
20 %
Foll ows the topi c- by- topi c app roac h
Incl ude s clea r tran sitio ns
Use s com par e and cont rast sign als
Inte grat es rese arch ed evid enc e
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. The essay lacks compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are lackin g or ineffec tive. Resea rch is not integra ted at all.
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. Little to no attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted but ineffec tive. Resea rch is integra ted poorly, if at all.
The essay attemp ts the topic- by- topic appro ach, but it is ineffec tive. Some attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Some attenti on is paid to transiti onal phrase s, but further attenti on is requir ed. Resea rched eviden ce is attemp ted, but not succe ssfully integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay may/ may not attemp t a topic- by- topic appro ach. Effort is made to includ e compa re/ contra st singla s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted and mostly succe ssful. Resea rched eviden ce is includ ed, but could be better integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay succe eds with a topic- by- topic appro ach. Comp are/ contra st signal s are strong and appro priate. Transit ional phrase s are presen t throug hout the essay. Resea rched eviden ce is expertl y woven into the essay with origina l insight .
Clo sin g (Co ncl usi on Par agr aph ) 20 %
Incl ude s a remi nde r of the expl icit thes is and sup porti ng poin ts.
Mak es a dire ct atte mpt to eng age the audi enc e.
Doe s not intro duc e new idea s/ clai ms
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. There is no attemp t to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. Little to no attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph attemp ts to remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points, though improv ement is possib le. Some attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims may be presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. An attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time, though some improv ement is possib le. New ideas/ claims are not presen ted.
The conclu sion paragr aph though tfully remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. A final attemp t at audien ce engag ement is attemp ted. No new ideas/ claims are presen ted.
Lan gua ge and Styl e 13.3 %
Sen tenc e Stru ctur e (Gra mm ar)
Wor d Cho ice/ Voc abul ary (Re dun dan cy, rep etiti on, awk war dne ss)
The writer has given very little or no appar ent consid eration to langua ge and style. Word choice is sloppy and/or incorre ct.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style dimini shes the nature and strengt h of the essay. Writer’ s langua ge/ style choice s make the essay less cohesi ve and/or difficul t to unders tand.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style, at times, deters from his/ her/ their overall argum ent. The writer’ s word choice and style someti mes detract s from the overall messa ge.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style helps conve y the author’ s point(s ). The writer almost always uses langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style accent uates the nature of the essay. Writer wields langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
Pun ctu atio n, Cap itali zati on 13.3 %
Co mm a erro rs, com ma spli ces, apo stro phe erro rs, capi taliz atio n erro rs, sem icol on erro rs, colo n erro rs, typo s/ mis spel ling s
Contai ns more than 6 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors.
The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout.
The errors help to signific antly deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns many (more than 4) differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors are repeat ed throug hout.
The errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns more than 3 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout. At times, the errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns 1-2 types of punctu ation/ capital ization errors, which may be repeat ed throug hout the essay. The errors do not deter from the writer’ s overall narrati ve, but they serve as a distrac tion.
Contai ns either no punctu ation/ capital ization errors, or no more than 2 differe nt errors with no repetiti on, and/or the errors do not deter from the writer’ s narrati ve.
Atte ntio n to Dire ctio ns/ For mat 13.4 %
Ess ay For matt ing req uire men ts, as note d for the cour se.
Doesn ’t meet format ting and/or word count requir ement s, and as a result, the writing is difficul t to read or unrea dable.
Meets very few format ting requir ement s, and those missin g deter from the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets some format ting requir ement s: the lack of appro priate format ting may lead to a lack of reada bility or to a distrac tion while readin g.
Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets most format ting requir ement s; the format ting does not discou rage reada bility. Word count minim um is met.
Meets all of the sugge sted essay format ting requir ement s; format ting enhan ces the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um is met.
ENG 101 Rubric: Compare/Contrast Essay
Points
0-1
Points
2
Points
3
Points
4
Points
5
Intr odu ctio n
(Fir st Par agr aph )
20 %
Ope ning “ho ok”
Bac kgro und Info rmat ion
Expl icit The sis
Spe cific Sup porti ng Poi nts
The openin g “hook” is not presen t. The thesis does not contai n a clear compa re/ contra st thesis and/or severa l specifi c suppor ting points. The writer’ s aware ness of the audien ce is not appar ent.
The openin g “hook” is not appar ent. The compa re/ contra st thesis and/or the suppor ting points are hard to discer n; the author' s aware ness of the audien ce is difficul t to ascert ain.
The openin g “hook” is attemp ted, but it may/ may not be succe ssfully engagi ng. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are eviden t, though they may lack strengt h; it loosel y prepar es the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” is presen t and may/ may not enhan ce the reader ’s interes t in the materi al. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are presen t, and both prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” grabs the reader ’s attenti on. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are strong and clear, and they though tfully prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
Ess ay Dev elo pm ent (Bo dy Par agr aph s)
20 %
Foll ows the topi c- by- topi c app roac h
Incl ude s clea r tran sitio ns
Use s com par e and cont rast sign als
Inte grat es rese arch ed evid enc e
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. The essay lacks compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are lackin g or ineffec tive. Resea rch is not integra ted at all.
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. Little to no attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted but ineffec tive. Resea rch is integra ted poorly, if at all.
The essay attemp ts the topic- by- topic appro ach, but it is ineffec tive. Some attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Some attenti on is paid to transiti onal phrase s, but further attenti on is requir ed. Resea rched eviden ce is attemp ted, but not succe ssfully integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay may/ may not attemp t a topic- by- topic appro ach. Effort is made to includ e compa re/ contra st singla s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted and mostly succe ssful. Resea rched eviden ce is includ ed, but could be better integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay succe eds with a topic- by- topic appro ach. Comp are/ contra st signal s are strong and appro priate. Transit ional phrase s are presen t throug hout the essay. Resea rched eviden ce is expertl y woven into the essay with origina l insight .
Clo sin g (Co ncl usi on Par agr aph ) 20 %
Incl ude s a remi nde r of the expl icit thes is and sup porti ng poin ts.
Mak es a dire ct atte mpt to eng age the audi enc e.
Doe s not intro duc e new idea s/ clai ms
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. There is no attemp t to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. Little to no attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph attemp ts to remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points, though improv ement is possib le. Some attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims may be presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. An attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time, though some improv ement is possib le. New ideas/ claims are not presen ted.
The conclu sion paragr aph though tfully remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. A final attemp t at audien ce engag ement is attemp ted. No new ideas/ claims are presen ted.
Lan gua ge and Styl e 13.3 %
Sen tenc e Stru ctur e (Gra mm ar)
Wor d Cho ice/ Voc abul ary (Re dun dan cy, rep etiti on, awk war dne ss)
The writer has given very little or no appar ent consid eration to langua ge and style. Word choice is sloppy and/or incorre ct.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style dimini shes the nature and strengt h of the essay. Writer’ s langua ge/ style choice s make the essay less cohesi ve and/or difficul t to unders tand.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style, at times, deters from his/ her/ their overall argum ent. The writer’ s word choice and style someti mes detract s from the overall messa ge.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style helps conve y the author’ s point(s ). The writer almost always uses langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style accent uates the nature of the essay. Writer wields langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
Pun ctu atio n, Cap itali zati on 13.3 %
Co mm a erro rs, com ma spli ces, apo stro phe erro rs, capi taliz atio n erro rs, sem icol on erro rs, colo n erro rs, typo s/ mis spel ling s
Contai ns more than 6 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors.
The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout.
The errors help to signific antly deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns many (more than 4) differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors are repeat ed throug hout.
The errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns more than 3 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout. At times, the errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns 1-2 types of punctu ation/ capital ization errors, which may be repeat ed throug hout the essay. The errors do not deter from the writer’ s overall narrati ve, but they serve as a distrac tion.
Contai ns either no punctu ation/ capital ization errors, or no more than 2 differe nt errors with no repetiti on, and/or the errors do not deter from the writer’ s narrati ve.
Atte ntio n to Dire ctio ns/ For mat 13.4 %
Ess ay For matt ing req uire men ts, as note d for the cour se.
Doesn ’t meet format ting and/or word count requir ement s, and as a result, the writing is difficul t to read or unrea dable.
Meets very few format ting requir ement s, and those missin g deter from the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets some format ting requir ement s: the lack of appro priate format ting may lead to a lack of reada bility or to a distrac tion while readin g.
Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets most format ting requir ement s; the format ting does not discou rage reada bility. Word count minim um is met.
Meets all of the sugge sted essay format ting requir ement s; format ting enhan ces the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um is met.
ENG 101 Rubric: Compare/Contrast Essay
Points
0-1
Points
2
Points
3
Points
4
Points
5
Intr odu ctio n
(Fir st Par agr aph )
20 %
Ope ning “ho ok”
Bac kgro und Info rmat ion
Expl icit The sis
Spe cific Sup porti ng Poi nts
The openin g “hook” is not presen t. The thesis does not contai n a clear compa re/ contra st thesis and/or severa l specifi c suppor ting points. The writer’ s aware ness of the audien ce is not appar ent.
The openin g “hook” is not appar ent. The compa re/ contra st thesis and/or the suppor ting points are hard to discer n; the author' s aware ness of the audien ce is difficul t to ascert ain.
The openin g “hook” is attemp ted, but it may/ may not be succe ssfully engagi ng. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are eviden t, though they may lack strengt h; it loosel y prepar es the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” is presen t and may/ may not enhan ce the reader ’s interes t in the materi al. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are presen t, and both prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
The openin g “hook” grabs the reader ’s attenti on. The compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points are strong and clear, and they though tfully prepar e the audien ce for a compa re/ contra st analys is.
Ess ay Dev elo pm ent (Bo dy Par agr aph s)
20 %
Foll ows the topi c- by- topi c app roac h
Incl ude s clea r tran sitio ns
Use s com par e and cont rast sign als
Inte grat es rese arch ed evid enc e
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. The essay lacks compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are lackin g or ineffec tive. Resea rch is not integra ted at all.
The essay does not follow the topic- by- topic organi zation al appro ach. Little to no attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted but ineffec tive. Resea rch is integra ted poorly, if at all.
The essay attemp ts the topic- by- topic appro ach, but it is ineffec tive. Some attenti on is paid to compa re/ contra st signal s. Some attenti on is paid to transiti onal phrase s, but further attenti on is requir ed. Resea rched eviden ce is attemp ted, but not succe ssfully integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay may/ may not attemp t a topic- by- topic appro ach. Effort is made to includ e compa re/ contra st singla s. Transit ional phrase s are attemp ted and mostly succe ssful. Resea rched eviden ce is includ ed, but could be better integra ted with origina l insight .
The essay succe eds with a topic- by- topic appro ach. Comp are/ contra st signal s are strong and appro priate. Transit ional phrase s are presen t throug hout the essay. Resea rched eviden ce is expertl y woven into the essay with origina l insight .
Clo sin g (Co ncl usi on Par agr aph ) 20 %
Incl ude s a remi nde r of the expl icit thes is and sup porti ng poin ts.
Mak es a dire ct atte mpt to eng age the audi enc e.
Doe s not intro duc e new idea s/ clai ms
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. There is no attemp t to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph does not remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. Little to no attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims are presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph attemp ts to remind reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points, though improv ement is possib le. Some attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time. New ideas/ claims may be presen t and undev eloped .
The conclu sion paragr aph remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. An attemp t is made to engag e the audien ce one final time, though some improv ement is possib le. New ideas/ claims are not presen ted.
The conclu sion paragr aph though tfully remind s reader s of the compa re/ contra st thesis and suppor ting points. A final attemp t at audien ce engag ement is attemp ted. No new ideas/ claims are presen ted.
Lan gua ge and Styl e 13.3 %
Sen tenc e Stru ctur e (Gra mm ar)
Wor d Cho ice/ Voc abul ary (Re dun dan cy, rep etiti on, awk war dne ss)
The writer has given very little or no appar ent consid eration to langua ge and style. Word choice is sloppy and/or incorre ct.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style dimini shes the nature and strengt h of the essay. Writer’ s langua ge/ style choice s make the essay less cohesi ve and/or difficul t to unders tand.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style, at times, deters from his/ her/ their overall argum ent. The writer’ s word choice and style someti mes detract s from the overall messa ge.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style helps conve y the author’ s point(s ). The writer almost always uses langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
The writer’ s use of langua ge and style accent uates the nature of the essay. Writer wields langua ge and style as a tool to enhan ce the essay.
Pun ctu atio n, Cap itali zati on 13.3 %
Co mm a erro rs, com ma spli ces, apo stro phe erro rs, capi taliz atio n erro rs, sem icol on erro rs, colo n erro rs, typo s/ mis spel ling s
Contai ns more than 6 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors.
The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout.
The errors help to signific antly deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns many (more than 4) differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors are repeat ed throug hout.
The errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns more than 3 differe nt punctu ation/ capital ization errors. The identic al or similar errors may be repeat ed throug hout. At times, the errors deter from the writer’ s overall argum ent.
Contai ns 1-2 types of punctu ation/ capital ization errors, which may be repeat ed throug hout the essay. The errors do not deter from the writer’ s overall narrati ve, but they serve as a distrac tion.
Contai ns either no punctu ation/ capital ization errors, or no more than 2 differe nt errors with no repetiti on, and/or the errors do not deter from the writer’ s narrati ve.
Atte ntio n to Dire ctio ns/ For mat 13.4 %
Ess ay For matt ing req uire men ts, as note d for the cour se.
Doesn ’t meet format ting and/or word count requir ement s, and as a result, the writing is difficul t to read or unrea dable.
Meets very few format ting requir ement s, and those missin g deter from the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets some format ting requir ement s: the lack of appro priate format ting may lead to a lack of reada bility or to a distrac tion while readin g.
Word count minim um may not be not met.
Meets most format ting requir ement s; the format ting does not discou rage reada bility. Word count minim um is met.
Meets all of the sugge sted essay format ting requir ement s; format ting enhan ces the reada bility of the writing . Word count minim um is met.
Writing Tips: The Compare/Contrast Essay
• Be sure that your introduction includes general background information on your two topics. For instance, you might try defining the two topics, explaining how they work, or providing their history to readers.
• Keep in mind that the introduction should be shaped like a funnel–starting broadly and then ending more specifically with an explicit thesis statement that contains a compare/contrast claim and at least three supporting
points.
• Draft your essay using third-person perspective; this essay is more formal in tone and texture than some of your previous writing projects.
• Make the most of the point-by-point organizational approach. Focus on how the structure allows for straightforward compare/contrast analysis. You’ll want to emphasize as much as possible how the two topics you have chosen are similar, different, or a combination of the two: similar and different. This emphasis will happen through intentional compare/contrast language and analysis.
• Plan to keep a narrow and specific focus throughout this essay: it should be clear to readers how all compare/contrast points are connected to your thesis. If you introduce ideas that do not directly relate to your thesis, you will either want to more closely connect them or remove them entirely during your revision stage.
• Make sure your conclusion summarizes the most important ideas in your essay, including the main compare/contrast thesis/claim and supporting points. However, be sure that you are not repeating your thesis verbatim with this final overview. Also, think about closing on a thoughtful note, but don’t be cliche.
Supplemental Resource: You may find the following vocabulary list helpful when you are making compare/ contrast claims in your essay. It is important to emphasize whether you are comparing or contrasting ideas, as you present them to readers, so choosing specific language that reflects this goal is essential.
Compare Contrast • Similarly • In comparison • Likewise • As well as • Also • Additionally • Like • In common • Equally
• Differing • In contrast • However • But • Unlike • On the other hand • While • Although • Even though
Step-By-Step Checklist: Ready, Set, Write!
Step by Step Checklist: Crafting the Compare/Contrast Essay Begin by brainstorming two topics that might be effectively compared, contrasted, or compared and contrasted. Once you have settled on your two topics, start to plot out your points of comparison and/or contrast using graphic organizational strategies like a Venn diagram or a compare and contrast table. You can also just create a simple list of these points, if you prefer. Once you have a robust list of compare and contrast points, you will need to narrow the focus to a select few. Often, three points work well for this paper. You can certainly choose more, but do not choose less than three supporting points, or you may not achieve full development and support of your claims.
Next, create a specific and straightforward explicit thesis/claim statement. The reader should have no confusion about your purpose (to compare, to contrast, or to compare and contrast) or the supporting points that you will be using to prove the similarities and differences between your topics. Then, start outlining your point-by-point organizational strategy. As you work to organize your own ideas, you should also begin to carefully collect source material or evidence. While you need to include at least two reliable and credible sources with this essay, your original insight and analysis is still the most important part of this essay. The research should be a complement to your ideas, not the central focus. Don’t forget to continue to focus on your compare/contrast language and analysis. Readers should never wonder what you are trying to demonstrate with this essay.
Be sure to use third-person perspective throughout the entire essay.
When it comes to your conclusion, remember to remind readers of your thesis and all of your supporting points in this final paragraph, but don’t repeat the thesis verbatim. Instead, summarize all that has come before in the essay, using different language. Be sure to avoid introducing new ideas in the conclusion, as this could confuse readers (and these ideas can’t become fully developed or supported).
Proofread your essay by correcting any errors in spelling, usage, mechanics, style/language, grammar, and sentence structure. Double-check that you are using MLA formatting.
Point by Point Compare-Contrast Chart
INSTRUCTIONS: Use this table to compare two things.
Topic #1 Similarities of Topic 1 and 2
Topic #2
Point-by-Point Differences
Point-by-Point Differences
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Venn Diagram: Compare/Contrast Two Items
Type details here
Type details here
Similarities Item 1 Item 2
Type details here
Will complete by: _______
1
Watch Compare/ Contrast Essay Video
2
Review Assignment Instructions
3
Review Assignment Rubric
4
Review the Writing Tips
5
Review the Annotated and Good/Bad Examples
6
Participate in Reader Review
7
Populate the Graphic Organizer(s)
8
Compile the Essay
Pro Tip
9
Revise the draft using
• Evaluator guidance • Your corrections • Writing Center feedback
Compare Contrast Requirements
Prompt: Write a compare/contrast essay in point-by-point structure where you attempt to show readers how two subjects are similar, different, or a combination of the two.
Requirements
• 2 credible sources • 750 words minimum • Underline thesis/theme
Submit Assignment
*Turnitin Assignment
Name Writing Assignment: Compare/Contrast
Summary
Submit an OPTIONAL reflection at the end of your draft.
Suggestions on what to include in your reflection:
1. What draft are you presently submitting?
2. What was the writing process like for you?
3. Where did you stumble, and where do you need additional guidance?
*Turnitin Assignment
Name Writing Assignment: Compare/Contrast
Summary
Submit an OPTIONAL reflection at the end of your draft.
Suggestions on what to include in your reflection:
1. What draft are you presently submitting?
2. What was the writing process like for you?
3. Where did you stumble, and where do you need additional guidance?
