| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| SOC-500 | SOC-500-O501 | Mead and Goffman Comparison | 150.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% |
| Assignment includes a basic summary of the theories proposed by each theorist. | 30.0% | Assignment does not include a basic summary of the theories proposed by each theorist. | Assignment includes a basic summary of the theories proposed by each theorist in a cursory manner. | Assignment includes a basic summary of the theories proposed by each theorist in a competent manner; demonstrates an adequate understanding of the topic. | Assignment includes a basic summary of the theories proposed by each theorist in a logical, well-connected manner; demonstrates an analytical understanding of the topic. | Assignment includes a basic summary of the theories proposed by each theorist in an insightful and well-delineated manner; demonstrates a commanding understanding of the topic. |
| Assignment includes a comparison of the similarities and differences between these two theorists. | 40.0% | Assignment does not include a comparison of the similarities and differences between these two theorists. | Assignment includes a comparison of the similarities and differences between these two theorists in a cursory manner. | Assignment includes a comparison of the similarities and differences between these two theorists in a competent manner; demonstrates an adequate understanding of the topic. | Assignment includes a comparison of the similarities and differences between these two theorists in a logical, well-connected manner; demonstrates an analytical understanding of the topic. | Assignment includes a comparison of the similarities and differences between these two theorists in an insightful and well-delineated manner; demonstrates a commanding understanding of the topic. |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 15.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Format | 10.0% |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
lazier
Rubric_Print_Format.xlsx
