Criteria
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
Pts
|
Introduction
|
-weak introduction of topic & subtopics
- weak and lacks an arguable position
|
-adequate introduction that states topic and some of the subtopics
- somewhat clear and arguable
|
-proficient introduction that states topic and all subtopics in proper order
- clear and arguable statement of position
|
-exceptional introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic and all subtopics in proper order
- exceptionally clear, arguable, well developed, and a definitive statement
|
|
Quality of Information / Evidence
|
-limited information on topic with lack of research or detail
|
-some aspects of paper is researched with some accurate evidence from limited sources
|
-paper is well researched in detail with accurate & critical evidence from a variety of sources
|
-paper is exceptionally researched and extremely detailed with critical evidence
|
|
Support of Ideas / Analysis
|
-limited connections made between evidence, subtopics, counterarguments & topic
-lack of analysis
|
-some connections made between evidence, subtopics, counterarguments & topic showing analysis
|
-consistent connections made between evidence, subtopics, counterarguments & topic showing good analysis
|
-exceptionally critical, relevant and consistent connections made between evidence, subtopics, counter-arguments & topic showing excellent analysis
|
|
Organization / Development of Ideas
|
-paper lacks clear and logical development of ideas
|
-somewhat clear and logical development of subtopics
|
-clear and logical subtopic order that supports topic
|
-exceptionally clear, logical, mature, and thorough development of subtopics that support topic
|
|
Conclusion
|
-lack of summary of topic & subtopics with weak concluding ideas
|
-adequate summary of topic and some subtopics with some final concluding ideas
|
-good summary of topic and all subtopics with clear concluding ideas
|
-excellent summary of topic (with no new information) & all subtopics in proper order with concluding ideas that leave an impact on reader
|
|
Language Conventions
|
- inconsistent grammar, spelling and paragraphing throughout paper
|
-paper has some errors in grammar, spelling and paragraphing
|
-paper is clear, with mostly proper grammar, spelling and paragraphing
|
-paper is very concise, clear, with consistently proper grammar, spelling and paragraphing
|
|
Total /24
Score:
|
Levels of Achievement
|
Criteria
|
Exemplary
|
Proficient
|
Marginal
|
Unacceptable
|
Organization
|
1. Presentation is clear, logical
and organized.
2. Listener can follow line of
reasoning.
|
1. Presentation is generally clear
and well organized.
2. A few minor points may be
confusing.
|
1. Organization seems
haphazard.
2. Listener can follow presentation
with effort. Some arguments are
not clear.
|
1. Logic of arguments is not
made clear.
2. Listeners are confused.
|
Style/Delivery
|
1. Level of presentation is
appropriate for the audience.
2. Speaker is clearly comfortable
in front of the group and can be
heard by all.
3. Presentation is paced for
audience understanding.
4. Consults notes; none of the
presentation is read
|
1. Level of presentation is
generally appropriate.
2. The presenter seems slightly
uncomfortable at times, and
the audience occasionally has
trouble hearing him/her.
3. Pacing is sometimes too fast
or slow.
4. Minimal reading of information
|
1. Aspects of presentation are
too elementary or too
sophisticated for audience.
2. Presenter seems
uncomfortable and can be
heard only if listener is very
attentive.
3. Pacing is too fast or too slow
4. Much of the information is
read.
|
1. Presentation consistently
is too elementary or too
sophisticated for the
audience.
2. Presenter is obviously
anxious and cannot be
heard.
3. There is no Pacing at all.
4. Information is read to
audience
|
