Literary & Critical Analysis Essays: Grading Rubric
Gabriel Hartley, Ohio University
from http://www.ajdrake.com/e240_itm_04/materials/guides/wr_rubric.htm
Al Drake says: I offer the following grading rubric (only slightly altered) because it serves as a good explanation of how most teachers, myself included, go about establishing a grade for a paper or for a full-length exam response. I don’t plan to apply this standard mechanically, but if you internalize the category standards set forth for “A” papers, you will be writing with much the same goals in mind as teachers generally have when they put grade to paper. I’ve never seen a better breakdown of what goes into a letter grade than the document that UCI’s Humanities Core Course developers have posted.
|
Letter Grades |
Conceptual |
Thesis |
Development and Support |
Structuring |
Language |
|
A |
offers cogent analysis, shows command of interpretive and conceptual tasks required by assignment and course materials: ideas original, often insightful, going beyond ideas discussed in lecture and class |
essay controlled by clear, precise, well-defined thesis: is sophisticated in both statement and insight |
well-chosen examples; persuasive reasoning used to develop and support thesis consistently: uses quotations and citations effectively; causal connections between ideas are evident |
appropriate, clear and smooth transitions; arrangement of paragraphs seems particularly apt |
uses sophisticated sentences effectively; usually chooses words aptly; observes conventions of written English and manuscript format; makes few minor or technical errors |
|
B |
shows a good understanding of the texts, ideas and methods of the assignment; goes beyond the obvious; may contain one minor factual or conceptual inconsistency |
clear, specific, argumentative thesis central to the essay; may have left minor terms undefined |
pursues thesis consistently: develops a main argument with clear major points and appropriate textual evidence and supporting detail; makes an effort to organize paragraphs topically |
distinct units of thought in paragraphs controlled by specific and detailed topic sentences; clear transitions between developed, cohering, and logically arranged paragraphs that are internally cohesive |
some mechanical difficulties or stylistic problems; may make occasional problematic word choices or awkward syntax errors; a few spelling or punctuation errors or cliché; usually presents quotations effectively |
|
C |
shows an understanding of the basic ideas and information involved in the assignment; may contain some factual, interpretive, or conceptual errors |
general thesis or controlling idea; may not define several central terms |
only partially develops the argument; shallow analysis; some ideas and generalizations undeveloped or unsupported; makes limited use of textual evidence; fails to integrate quotations appropriately |
some awkward transitions; some brief, weakly unified or undeveloped paragraphs; arrangement may not appear entirely natural; contains extraneous information |
more frequent wordiness; several unclear or awkward sentences; imprecise use of words or over-reliance on passive voice; one or two major grammatical errors (subject-verb agreement, comma splice, etc.); effort to present quotations accurately |
|
D |
shows inadequate command of course materials or contains significant factual and conceptual errors; does not respond directly to the demands of the assignment; confuses some significant ideas |
thesis vague or not central to argument; central terms not defined |
frequently only narrates; digresses from one topic to another without developing ideas or terms; makes insufficient or awkward use of textual evidence |
simplistic, tends to narrate or merely summarize; wanders from one topic to another; illogical arrangement of ideas |
some major grammatical or proofreading errors (subject-verb agreement; sentence fragments); language marred by clichés, colloquialisms, repeated inexact word choices; inappropriate quotations or citations format |
|
F |
writer has not understood lectures, readings, discussion, or assignment |
no discernible thesis |
little or no development; may list facts or misinformation; uses no quotations or fails to cite sources or plagiarizes |
no transitions; incoherent paragraphs; suggests poor planning or no serious revision |
numerous grammatical errors and stylistic problems seriously distract from the argument |
|
comments for category |
|||||
|
grade for essay |
|||||