Module 6 – Chapter 17: Langan Essay Assignment

ERAU Writing Rubric v 8 Page 1 of 3

ORGANIZATION Organization Superior Satisfactory Poor Introduction provides context; includes thesis & forecast if required

Clearly provides all necessary information & sets expectations

Minor lack or excess of information; minor lack of clarity

Confusing, vague or lacking

Body Structure: Paragraphs focus on one major idea each; Transitions clearly show relationships among ideas

Paragraphs consistently meet expectations; transitions very clear

1-3 lapses in paragraphs; 1-3 problems with transitions

So many lapses in paragraphs or problems with transitions that comprehension is difficult

Conclusion decisively ends paper Ends paper with powerful impact; creates a fully satisfying sense of completion

Ending works, but may be weak or does not create a good sense of completion

Weak, confusing or missing ending

Content & Assignment Parameters (category descriptions are suggestions only) Categories: logical progression; main points well supported; evidence of higher order thinking.

Overall exemplary fulfillment of assignment; treatment is focused, fully relevant, goes well beyond the obvious connections; exhibits insight and original thinking

1-3 errors in any of the categories; adequate fulfillment of assignment; treatment is focused and relevant

Many errors in any of the categories; very poor fulfillment of assignment; treatment loses focus or relevance, or is very superficial

LANGUAGE & STYLE

Language & Style Superior Satisfactory Poor Vocabulary is appropriate; avoids jargon, slang, and overly emotionally charged words.

Skillful word choice that is precise, purposeful and always appropriate

Relatively few minor errors So many errors that writing is difficult to comprehend or offensive or irrelevant

Grammar, spelling, punctuation, sentence construction (fragments, run- ons, etc.)

Few to no errors (1% or less of assignment word total)

Some errors (less than 5% of word total)

Errors detract significantly from comprehension

RESEARCH & DOCUMENTATION

Research & Documentation Superior Satisfactory Poor Sources/Number Quality & Variety (sufficient credible, unbiased sources to show an in-depth exploration from several points of view)

Significantly more than the minimum required; clearly credible and unbiased; effort beyond expectations; use of primary & secondary sources

At least the minimum required; most are credible and unbiased; effort made to ensure quality and depth

Less than the minimum required; most sources lack quality criteria (ex: Wikipedia); no attempt to explore various points of view

Sources/ Integration & Citation (quoting, summarizing, and paraphrasing; in-text citations and references adhere to required style)

Sources interspersed with writer’s own analysis or synthesis; quotes are less than 10% of paper; 1-5 minor errors in documentation

Sources interspersed with writer’s own work; quotes are less than 20% of paper; more than 5 minor errors in documentation

Sources strung together with little of the writer’s own work; quotes are 50% or more of paper; citations missing or with major errors; plagiarism

ERAU Writing Rubric v 8 Page 2 of 3

ORGANIZATION Organization Superior Satisfactory Poor Introduction provides contextual information (background, definitions, expectations & scope); includes thesis statement & forecast (preview of structure of the paper) if required

Clearly provides all necessary information; avoids giving too much; clearly sets expectations

Clearly provides necessary information but may give too much; or expectations may be somewhat unclear

Confusing, vague or lacking necessary information

Body Structure: Paragraphs contain one major idea each & sufficient, relevant supporting details; Transitions clearly show relationships among ideas

Paragraphs consistently meet expectations; transitions very clear and easy to follow; entire body is coherent and unified

1-3 lapses in paragraphs (more than one major idea, not enough details); 1-3 problems with transitions (missing or incorrect)

Paragraphs and transitions create confusion; paper wanders; difficult to follow the train of thought

Conclusion decisively ends paper; provides a sense of completion; ex: summary, strong final impression; call to action

Ends paper with a powerful impact; creates a fully satisfying sense of completion

Ending works, but may leave the reader unimpressed

Ending leaves an inappropriate impression; may consist of simple repetition or leave the reader wondering if the writer was finished

Content & Assignment Parameters (instructor must decide on appropriate subject matter content; these category descriptions are suggestions only) Categories: logical progression of ideas; main points well supported; evidence of higher order thinking (synthesis, analysis, evaluation, and/or interpretation).

No errors in any of the categories; overall exemplary fulfillment of assignment requirements; treatment is focused, fully relevant & clearly goes well beyond the obvious connections among ideas; exhibits insight and original thinking

1-3 errors in any of the categories; adequate fulfillment of assignment requirements; treatment is focused and relevant; does not wander from topic or purpose

Very poor fulfillment of assignment; treatment loses focus or relevance, or is very superficial; paper may go off topic, provide irrelevant, confusing, and/or vague information, or draw illogical conclusions

LANGUAGE & STYLE

Language & Style

Superior Satisfactory Poor

Vocabulary is appropriate for audience and purpose; avoids jargon, slang, and overly emotionally charged words; sufficient variation

Skillful word choice that is precise, purposeful and always appropriate

Relatively few (1-10?) minor errors in word choices; perhaps too much repetition of words or some use of jargon

Very many word choices are inappropriate for audience or purpose, lack precision, and/or are too vague or general; many uses of jargon, slang, or overly emotionally charged words; possible use of offensive language

Grammar, spelling, punctuation, sentence construction (fragments, run- ons, etc.)

Few to no errors (1% or less of assignment word total); errors are minor ones (commas, semicolons-- errors that do not significantly compromise comprehension)

Some errors (less than 5% of word total); errors are mostly minor ones; may be 2-3 major errors (fragments, mixed constructions-- errors that significantly compromise comprehension)

Errors detract significantly from comprehension; cause confusion and frustration; create contradictions or impossibilities

ERAU Writing Rubric v 8 Page 3 of 3

RESEARCH & DOCUMENTATION - FIRST PAGE BACK Research & Documentation Superior Satisfactory Poor Sources/Number Quality & Variety (enough sources to show an in-depth exploration from several points of view; clear indication of credible authorship; sources present fair and unbiased info; good variety)

Significantly more than the minimum required; effort beyond expectations to explore topic; use of both primary & secondary sources; all information meets high quality criteria; if biased information is used, bias is acknowledged and balancing sources are also used

At least the minimum required; effort to ensure reasonable breadth and depth; possibly no primary sources; all information meets high quality criteria

Less than the minimum required; little breadth and depth of exploration; most sources lack quality criteria (ex: Wikipedia); no attempt to explore various points of view

Sources/ Integration & Citation (avoiding the ‘paper as a string of references’; quoting, summarizing, and paraphrasing; citations in-text and on references / bibliography page adhere to required style)

Sources interspersed with writer’s own analysis or synthesis; quotes are less than 10% of paper; accurate use of summary and paraphrase; all sources are documented; 1-5 minor errors (such as incorrect punctuation)

Sources interspersed with writer’s own work; quotes are less than 20% of paper; accurate use of summary and paraphrase; all sources are documented; more than 5 minor errors (such as incorrect punctuation);

Sources strung together with little of the writer’s own work; quotes are 50% or more of paper; citations missing or with major errors (ex: authors missing or incorrect); plagiarism