How I Evaluate Assignments:

The following is a summary of the criteria I use to evaluate most kinds of writing assignments. Please bear in mind that no list is universal--each assignment usually demands a few special categories of consideration, and I always make the appropriate adjustments depending on the assignment. For example: in-class writing is graded more loosely in terms of grammar and spelling than is out-of-class writing a creative piece must be evaluated differently than a research paper. Makes sense, right?

"4" paper: Excellent

• Fulfills and successfully pushes beyond the minimum requirements of the assignment in terms of thoroughness and level of detail
• Defines its purpose/thesis very clearly and addresses a defined audience
• Exemplifies a high level of sophistication in terms of content and style (i.e., goes beyond obvious points, shows originality of thought, tackles a difficult subject, flows logically and coherently, uses mature sentence structure and diction, etc.)
• Demonstrates evidence of careful and thoughtful revision
• Displays excellent overall organization and nearly flawless mechanics
• Makes effective and judicious use of other sources (if required), and documents them correctly
• Is readable, clear, and free from needless ambiguity

"3" paper: Very Good

• Fulfills the minimum requirements of the assignment, and attempts (not always successfully) to go further in terms of development
• Defines its purpose/thesis adequately and addresses a particular audience (with perhaps an occasional lapse)
• Displays coherent organization, with room for possible adjustment
• Demonstrates some degree of thoughtful revision
• Employs reasonably sound writing mechanics
• Uses and documents sources competently
• Is reasonably free from logical flaws and ambiguity (though minor lapses may occur)

"2" paper: Fair

• Fulfills the bare minimum of the assignment; makes no attempt to go beyond what's easy or obvious
• Defines an audience, but does not address it adequately or consistently
• Defines a purpose, but in an unclear or confusing manner--thesis is ineffective and unclear
• Presents material in a somewhat unorganized fashion
• Demonstrates little thoughtful revision--changes are made only on the surface (e.g., spelling and grammar)
• Documents sources and/or uses visuals, but not effectively
• Lacks clarity--the thought process is obscured and the prose is difficult to read
• Contains a number of stylistic and mechanical weaknesses (e.g., sentence structure may be simplistic and/or repetitive)

"1" paper: Needs a Major Overhaul

• Makes a minimal effort to fulfill the assignment, but fails to do an adequate job
• Lacks a clear purpose/focus
• Is seriously deficient in terms of audience awareness, organization, mechanics, documentation, etc.
• Is difficult to follow--fundamental errors or lack of thoughtful development make reading a chore