|
Categories
|
Excellent (A)
|
Effective (B)
|
Adequate (C)
|
Developing (D)
|
|
Invention and Purpose
|
Shares a detailed, interesting, complete story of the author’s search for an answer to a question; readers readily learn what the writer learned
|
Shares a detailed, complete story of the writer’s search for an answer to a question; readers learn what the writer learned
|
Shares a fairly detailed and mostly complete story of the writer’s search for an answer to a question; readers learn some of what the writer learned
|
Shares a vague or incomplete story of the writer’s search for an answer to a question; readers learn little of or aren’t sure what the writer learned
|
|
Arrangement and Audience Awareness
|
Arrangement consists of four distinct, effective sections; sophisticated transitions guide readers; conclusion provides a satisfying resolution
|
Arrangement consists of four distinct, complete sections; effective transitions guide readers; conclusion provides a satisfying resolution
|
Arrangement consists of four mostly complete sections; transitions formulaic or not always effective; conclusion provides little resolution
|
Sections missing, incomplete, or confusing; transitions missing or ineffective; conclusion off-topic or underdeveloped
|
|
Ethos and Evidence
|
Evidence and overall content easily convince the reader that the writer’s search has been varied and rigorous; includes at least one oral interview and one scholarly article; evidence use easily demonstrates author’s understanding of the sources
|
Evidence and overall content convince the reader the writer’s search has been varied and extensive; includes at least one oral interview and one scholarly article; evidence use demonstrates author’s understanding of the sources
|
Evidence and overall content somewhat convince the reader that the writer’s search has been varied or extensive; includes at least one oral interview and one scholarly article; evidence use demonstrates author mostly understands the sources
|
Evidence and overall content do not fully convince the reader that the writer’s search has been varied or extensive; missing oral interview or scholarly article; evidence use demonstrates author has limited understanding of the sources
|
|
|
|
Style and Conventions
|
Graceful language; exceptional control of standard writing & citation conventions appropriate to audience & genre; quotations integrated into writer’s own sentences; few errors
|
Control of writing and citation conventions for this audience/genre; quotations usually integrated into writer’s own sentences; few errors don’t impede readability
|
Some control of writing and/or citation conventions for this audience/genre; quotations sometimes integrated; some dropped-in quotes; errors frequent and/or impede readability
|
Little control of writing and/or citation conventions for this audience/genre; quotations excessive or not integrated into writer’s sentences; frequent errors significantly impede readability
|
|
Delivery
|
Attractive, easy-to-read document meets format/ length expectations
|
Functional, easy-to-read document meets format and length expectations
|
Document only somewhat easy to read and/or meets most but not all format and length expectations
|
Document may not be easy to read or may meet few format or length expectations
|
|
Post Write
|
Revision choices carefully explained; questions answered in full detail; includes thoughtful reflection on the writing/search process and product
|
Revision choices explained; questions answered fully; includes thoughtful reflection on the writing/search process and product
|
Some revision choices explained; questions answered perfunctorily; includes reflection on the writing/search process and product
|
Few revision choices explained; some questions answered; includes minimal reflection on the writing/search process and product
|
|
Comments
|
Fks96
I-SearchRubricSummer2018.docx
