Rubric

Rank	A (Outstanding)	B (Good)	C (Satisfactory)	D (Needs Work)
(Scoring)	4 points	3 points	2 points	1 point
Criterion
Focus of argument	Precise, concrete, complex thesis; highly coherent argument	Good thesis, but could be more specific; focused argument, but may lapse occasionally	Weak, simplistic, and/or unclear thesis; lack of a strong focus to argument	Vague and/or sloppy thesis; completely unfocused discussion
Depth of analysis	-- Explores issue thoroughly and intelligently -- Examines issue from multiple perspectives -- Explores ideas and develops a clear position with insight and persuasive examples	-- Explores issue adequately and with some insight -- Supports a defined position with good examples -- Argument and/or examples weak in places	-- Defines an issue, but explores it inadequately -- Use of examples is inconsistent and/or significantly lacking -- Argument is weakly supported, unpersuasive and/or contradictory	-- Doesn't adequately define or explore an issue -- Very weak support: poor and/or lack of relevant examples -- Lack of thoughtful development
Quality of research	-- Relevant, timely, and varied sources -- Excellent balance b/t scholarly and mainstream works -- # of sources exceeds minimum	-- Relevant and timely sources, but may be limited in scope -- Sufficient balance b/t scholarly and mainstream works -- # of sources at or above min.	-- Sources significantly lack in timeliness, scope, or relevance -- Clear lack of thorough research --Overreliance upon popular works -- Min. # of sources consulted	-- Dated and/or irrelevant sources -- Lack of fundamental research -- Lack of scholarly sources -- Min. # or fewer sources consulted
Integration of sources	-- Smooth and judicious integration of info. in argument -- Sources clearly relate to and support thesis -- Effective analysis/critique of sources -- Excellent balance b/t quoting and paraphrasing; emphasis on latter	-- Good integration of sources -- Sources relate to and support thesis, but inconsistently -- Sources are analyzed, but inconsistently and/or insufficiently -- OK balance b/t quoting and paraphrasing	--Inconsistent and/or sloppy integration of sources -- Sources only marginally support thesis -- Insufficient analysis of sources -- Inadequate balance b/t quoting and paraphrasing (too much quoting)	-- Poor integration of too few sources -- Sources don't support thesis -- Sources are "plopped in" without analysis
Organization	-- Clear and logical throughout -- Clear and forceful intro. -- Excellent transitions -- Focused paragraphs	-- Basically clear, with some lapses possible -- Adequate intro. -- Good transitions, but used inconsistently -- Generally focused paragraphs, with some lapses	-- Unclear: reader must work to discern organization -- Weakly developed intro. -- Inadequate use of transitions -- Many unfocused paragraphs	--Poor overall organ. -- Very weak intro. -- Lack of transitions -- High % of unfocused paragraphs
Mechanics and Style	-- Writer's voice is clear and strong -- Highly readable, fluid prose -- Sophisticated writing style -- Excellent grammar -- Careful editing	-- Writer's voice is somewhat overshadowed by sources -- Readable, generally clear prose -- Good grammar, with some errors -- Fair editing	-- Writer's voice is unclear, hard to discern -- Prose is often difficult to read -- Significant # and frequency of grammatical errors -- Weak editing	-- Prose is consistently unclear and difficult to read -- High # of errors -- Editing is poor or completely lacking
Docu- mentation	-- Excellent quoting and paraphrasing technique -- MLA style used consistently and correctly -- Complete and error-free works cited list	-- Good quoting and paraphrasing technique, with some lapses -- MLA style generally used well, allowing a few mistakes -- Good, but not perfect, works cited list	-- Just adequate quoting and paraphrasing technique, but many errors -- MLA style attempted, but used inconsistently -- Fair works cited list, but with several errors	-- Poor quoting and paraphrasing technique -- MLA style not used in text -- Works cited list not in MLA format, alphabetical order, etc.