qsn

Criteria

5 (Excellent)

4 (Good)

3 (Adequate)

2 (Emerging)

1 (Needs Work)

Introduction/Thesis

Conclusion

Well-developed introductory paragraph contains background and a clear explanation of the source article’s thesis that is to be analyzed. The name of the source article is mentioned along with the name of the author.

There is a smooth lead-into the thesis. The thesis statement establishes a clear stand on whether the argument is effective or ineffective. The thesis also indicates a broad reasoning for its effectiveness.

Conclusion emphasizes the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the argument with additional reasoning.

Introductory paragraph contains some background information and states the source article’s thesis to be analyzed but lacks adequate detail. There is a relatively smooth transition to the thesis. The thesis indicates whether the argument is effective or ineffective but may not provide a broad reasoning; Conclusion emphasizes the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the argument with additional reasoning.

Introduction states a clear thesis but does not adequately explain the background of the source article. The transition to the thesis is not smooth.

Conclusion summarizes main topics but is repetitive. No additional reasoning is provided

Thesis and/or problem is vague or unclear on whether the argument of the source article is effective. The transition into the thesis is a seemingly random collection of information, unclear, or not related to the source article. Conclusion does not adequately summarize the main points. No suggestions for change or opinions are included.

The thesis is missing or is a statement of fact which is not debatable. The thesis has no relation to the source article to be analyzed.

Conclusion is unclear and/or missing the main points; No suggestions for change or opinions are included.

Development-Body Paragraphs/Evidence

Three or more main points are well developed with supporting details. The evidence draws from research which is credible. The evidence is compelling. Student meets guidelines of the assignment in terms of page numbers and other stipulated requirements such as number of required sources.

Three or more main points are present but may lack detail and development in one or two. The evidence is present but not compelling. Student meets guidelines of the assignment in terms of page numbers and other stipulated requirements such as number of required sources; Sources are credible.

Three or more main points, but all lack development. There is insufficient evidence. Student tends to repeat arguments; Student does not meet guidelines in terms of page numbers and other stipulated requirements such as number of required sources; Some of the sources may not be credible

Less than three main points, with poor development of ideas; The is a noticeable lack of evidence in the paper. Student does not meet guidelines in terms of page numbers and other stipulated requirements such as number of required sources; The sources are insufficient and/or not credible.

The paper has only one body paragraph. There is a noticeable lack of evidence Student has not submitted more than 1-2 pages. There are no sources present. There are no appeals present

Rhetorical Triangle and Appeals

Source text is thoroughly and effectively.

contextualized with well-supported.

analysis of structure, rhetorical triangle

(Audience, author, purpose), and

rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos,

logos); focus is on analysis (not

summary or author’s own ideas of the

issue);

Contextualization and analysis of

source text is good and somewhat.

supported but could be improved.

focus is mostly on analysis (not

summary or author’s own ideas of

the issue)

Incomplete contextualization and

analysis of source text; parts of

rhetorical triangle or appeals may

be missing; little support is.

provided, overuse of summary.

use of discussion about the issue.

instead of analysis

Poor contextualization and

analysis of source text; not

supported by examples, overuse.

of summary and discussion about

the issue (not the analysis)

Analysis of source text missing. Overuse of summary/

Organization

Logical, compelling progression of ideas in essay; clear structure which enhances and showcases the central idea or theme and moves the reader through the text. Organization flows so smoothly the reader hardly thinks about it. Effective, mature, graceful transitions exist throughout the essay.

Overall, the paper is logically developed. Progression of ideas in essay makes sense and moves the reader easily through the text. Transitions are present but could be smoother.

Progression of ideas in essay is awkward yet moves the reader through the text without too much confusion. The writer sometimes lunges ahead too quickly or spends too much time on details that do not matter. Transitions appear sporadically, but not equally throughout the essay

Arrangement of essay is unclear and illogical. The writing lacks a clear sense of direction. Ideas, details, or events seem strung together in a loose or random fashion; there is no identifiable internal structure and readers have trouble following the writer’s line of thought. Few forced transitions in the essay or no transitions are present.

Paragraphs are unconnected. There is no direction in the paper. There are no transitions present.

Grammar/Mechanics

Sentence structure is correct. Punctuation and capitalization are correct. There are no run-ons/comma splices or fragments. Paper is virtually error-free.

Sentence structure is generally correct. Some awkward sentences do appear. There are one or two errors in punctuation and/or capitalization. There may be one or two errors regarding run-ons/comma splices or fragments

Work contains structural weaknesses and grammatical errors. There are three or four errors in punctuation and/or capitalization. There are further errors regarding run-ons/comma splices and/or fragments. However, essay is still readable despite multiple errors in grammar.

Work contains multiple incorrect sentence structures. There are four or more errors in punctuation and/or capitalization; Paper is challenging to understand because of grammar errors

Grammar errors are multiple and interfere with understanding the paper; It is possible to mis-read the paper because of errors in grammar and mechanics

MLA documentation

Source material is smoothly integrated into the text. All sources are accurately documented in the MLA format both in the text and on the Works Cited page. The paper is accurately formatted in MLA style. There are no errors.

Source material is used. All sources are accurately documented, but a few are not in the desired format. The paper has minor errors in formatting MLA style

Source material is used, but integration may be awkward. All sources are accurately documented, but many are not in the MLA format; The paper has noticeable errors in MLA formatting.

Sources are not accurately documented. There may be no Works Cited page. MLA formatting is incorrect through most of the paper.

There is no Works Cited page or in-text citation; There is no attempt at formatting the paper on MLA guidelines