Global Studies 120 Short Paper

D C B A

GRADING/MARKING

CRITERIA

Achievement that

minimally meets the

course requirements

Achievement that

satisfactorily meets the

course requirements

Achievement that is

significantly above the course

requirements

Achievement that is

outstanding relative to the

course requirements

COMMENTS Thesis/Argument: Logical

reasoning, supported

claims, and critical thinking.

25 points.

Argument is unclear

and does not

adequately respond to

the prompt or

demonstrate

relationship to course

materials.

Simple, standard argument

taken directly from course

materials. Adequately

responds to prompt.

Fully-formed, complete and

wholly logical argument.

Demonstrates clear

understanding of course

materials and prompt, but

develops a new approach to

standard arguments.

Fully-formed, complete and

wholly logical argument.

Demonstrates clear

understanding of course

materials and prompt, but

advances an original

argument not directly

discussed in course

materials. Analysis/synthesis:

Examination and

interpretation of class

materials to compare and

contrast ideologies and their

principles or goals.

35 points.

Key elements or

arguments may be

incorrectly identified;

analysis may be

attempted but

unjustified. Limited

provision of examples.

Most key elements and

arguments are identified.

Generally accurate, but

superficial interpretation,

comparison, categorization,

analysis or explanation from

readily available sources,

using examples in exact same

manner as class materials.

Key elements and arguments

are identified. Accurate

interpretation and analysis

with some rationale or

justification integrated into

explanation from readily

available sources, presenting

some new interpretations and

ideas based on course

materials.

Key elements and arguments

are identified and clarified in

detail. Accurate, deep

interpretation and

justification using

independent thought,

building on course materials

to present new and original

interpretations and ideas.

Discussion: Development,

depth, breadth and

synthesis. 30 points.

Significantly superficial.

Discussion lacks depth,

breadth and/or

examples to support

argument. Examples or

concepts incorrectly

identified or defined.

Adequate evidence of depth,

breadth and/or examples

from course materials to

support argument, but

connections between

argument and evidence not

clear or consistent. Partially

accurate understanding of

course concepts and authors'

arguments. Some minor

irrelevancies and inaccuracies.

Connects examples together

and to different specific

aspects of argument. Some

standard criticism or pro/con

points from course materials.

Generally accurate, extensive

understanding of course

concepts and authors'

arguments. Few minor

irrelevancies and

inaccuracies.

Deep and copious evidence

and/or comparative detail in

supporting argument with

clear, logical examples.

Discussion fully developed

with author's opinion or

interpretation in taking a

stance of advocacy or

criticism. Completely and

fully accurate, extensive

understanding of relevant

course concepts and

authors' arguments.

GENERAL CRITERIA

Writing, organization, & structure: Clarity and accuracy of message; clear, logical structure and flow; grammatical or spelling errors do not

obscure arguments. 5 points. Proper citation of sources with formatted references (in-text citations/bibliography or footnotes). 5 points.