You are on page 1of 8

)

)
Name:

Proposal Rubric
Learning Target: I can organize, interpret, and synthesize information from a variety of sources.
4

All eight note cards completed with


detailed information on each.

All eight note cards are completed


with all required information.

Six to seven note cards are


completed with all required
information.

Fewer than six note cards are


completed.

most significant evidence


presented succinctly with original
insight.

Three pieces of important evidence


(with citation) relevant to each subguiding question.

Three or fewer pieces of evidence


for each sub-guiding question. Some
evidence may not be entirely relevant
to question.

Less than three pieces of evidence


for each sub-guiding question. Much
of the evidence is not relevant or
important to question.

Evidence that both expert interviews


and fieldwork have been conducted.
Student not only makes connections
between interview and research
questions/process, but shows how
the interview helped move research
forward.

Evidence that both expert interviews


have been conducted. Student
consistently makes connections
between interview and research
questions and process.

Evidence that at least one expert


interview has been conducted.
Student sometimes makes
connections between interview and
research questions and process.

One or no interviews have been


completed. Student fails to make
connections between interview and
research interview and process.

Attempt is made to explain social


significance of expedition, but it is
vague or unclear

Social significance of project is


unexplained

Social significance of expedition is


clearly and persuasively explained

Social significance of expedition is


articulated

Learning Target: I can communicate about my research in a professional style.


4

Tone and style are consistently


formal, academic, and professional

Tone and style are, for the most part,


formal and academic

Tone and style are often colloquial


and informal

Tone and style are consistently


inappropriate for formal presentation

Student refers occasionally to notes


and makes consistent eye contact

Student refers to notes often but also


makes frequent eye contact

Student mostly reads notes but looks


up occasionally to make eye contact

Student reads notes and makes little


attempt to make eye contact

Tempo, volume, and articulation


are clear and student consistently
engages with audience

Tempo, volume, and articulation are


mostly clear

Student needs to be asked at times to


speak up or repeat something

Student does not clearly


communicate with audience

Name:

Outline Rubric
Learning Target: I can create a thesis statement that makes a precise, knowledgeable claim that directly responds to my
research question
4-Exceptional

Thesis directly answers the


prompt with a compelling claim.
Claim is provocative and
nuanced and can be supported
by evidence and analysis.
Thesis is convincingly argued
throughout the essay.

1-Basic

2-Developing

3-Proficient
Thesis directly answers the
prompt with a clear claim
Claim is debatable and can
be supported by evidence and
analysis
Thesis is developed consistently
throughout the essay

Thesis addresses the prompt,


but is too vague or doesn't
completely answer question
Claim is striving to make an
argument but is overly simplistic
Thesis Is developed In majority
ofessay

No thesis or thesis doesn't


respond directly to the prompt
No claim made but rather a
statement of feet
Ideas have little connection to
thesis

Learning Target: I can effectively organize my ideas (compare/contrast, cause/effect, problem/solution) to logically present
my claims, reasons, and evidence.
4

Sub-thesis statements directly


answer sub-guiding questions
with compelling claims
Topic sentences insightfully and
succinctly state claim of each
body paragraph
Main sections of the essay and
body paragraphs are ordered
logically and apt transitions
are always used purposefully
to guide reader through
progression of argument

Sub-thesis statements directly


answer sub-guiding questions
with clear claims
Topic sentences clearly state
claim of each body paragraph
Main sections of the essay and
body paragraphs are ordered
logically and transitions are
used consistently to guide
reader through progression of
argument

Sub-thesis statements answer


sub-guiding questions, but
claims are sometimes vague,
simplistic, or not logical
Topic sentences frequently
state the claim of the body
paragraphs but the claims aren't
always precise or clear
Main sections of essay
are ordered logically, but
body paragraphs are not
and transitions are used
inconsistently

Sub-thesis statements are


missing or don't adequately
respond to sub-guiding
questions
Topic sentences are unclear,
too broad, or don't match the
evidence providedforthe body
paragraph
Unclear reasoning for ordering
of Ideas and/or few purposeful
transition words

Learning Target: I can supply relevant evidence from specific sources to support my claims and answer my research
questions.

Evidence for each claim is


drawn from a wide variety of
scholarly sources including two
expert interviews
Consistently uses two or more
sources in each paragraph
Substantial, relevant and
convincing evidence provided
to support the argument and
claims

Evidence for most claims is


drawn from a wide variety of
sources including one expert
interview
Uses two or more sources in
most paragraphs
Specific, relevant, and
trustworthy evidence provided
to support the argument and
claims

Evidence for more than half of


claims is drawn from a variety of
trustworthy sources
Uses two sources in more than
half of the body paragraphs
Mostly relevant evidence
provided, but not specific or
detailed enough

Evidence for less than half of


claims is drawn from a variety of
trustworthy sources
Uses fewer than two sources
in more than half of body
paragraphs
Evidence is incomplete.
frequently unrelated to claims,
or often opinionated or too
general to be persuasive

Learning Target: I can correctly use MLA format for in-text citations.
4

Every piece of evidence is


cited correctly and accurately
according to MLA format

Almost every piece of evidence


is cited with few errors in MLA
format

Most pieces of evidence are


cited with regular minor errors in
MLA format

Fewer than half of evidence is


cited with frequent errors in MLA
format

/
I

Senior Expedition: Research Paper Rubric


CRITERIA
Thesis
1 can create a thesis
statement that makes a
precise, knowledgeable
claim that responds to
my research question.

4
Exceptional
Thesis directly answers research
question A with a persuasive and
insightful argument
Each body paragraph directly
contributes to answering research
question.

3.5

3
Proficient
Thesis directly answers research
question A with a clear claim
Body paragraphs are relevant to the
research question but don't always
directly support the persuasive
argument.

2.5

2
Developing
Thesis addresses the research
question, but is too vague or
doesn't completely answer
question
Most body paragraphs
contribute to answering research
question A and supporting thesis

1.5

1
Basic
No thesis or thesis doesn't
respond directly to the research
question
Ideas have little connection to
thesis
More than half of body
paragraphs don't directly
contribute to supporting thesis

Organization
1 can effectively organize
my ideas (compare/
contrast, cause/effect,
problem/solution) to
logically present my
claims, reasons, and
evidence.

Organization
1 can use transitions to
link the major sections
of the argument and
clarify the relationships
between clafm(s) and
reasons, between
reasons and evidence,
and between claim(s)
and counterclaims

Evidence
1 can supply relevant
evidence from specific
sources to support my
claims and answer my
research questions.

Evidence

Paragraphs are focused on a precise


claim that directly supports supports the
thesis
The evidence in the body paragraphs
clearly and persuasively supports the
claims in the topic sentences.

Each piece of evidence is ordered


purposefully to allow for a logicalflowof
ideas within every paragraph.
Apt transition words and phrases are
consistently used to smoothly reinforce
logical connections between pieces of
evidence.

Substantial, relevant and convincing


evidence provided to support each
claim
Wide variety of types of evidence
(facts, statistics, testimony, anecdote)
from a wide variety of sources
Evidence is introduced gracefully,

Paragraphs are mostly focused on a


claim that supports the thesis

Paragraphs are not consistently


focused on specific claims

Almost all of the evidence in the body


paragraphs supports the claims in the
topic sentences.

Most of the evidence in the body


paragraphs supports the claims
in the topic sentences.

Most pieces of evidence are ordered


purposefully to allow for a logical
flow of ideas within more than three
quarters of the body paragraphs.

Most pieces of evidence are


ordered purposefully to allow
for logical flow of ideas within
more than half of the body
paragraphs.

Transition words and phrases are


used to reinforce logical connections
between pieces of evidence.

Specific, relevant, and trustworthy


evidence provided to support claims
Variety of types of evidence with
multiple sources used in each body
paragraph

Evidence is introduced smoothly and

Transition words and phrases


are used but they are often
awkward or formulaic and don't
consistently highlight logical
flow.

Paragraphs aren't correctly


formatted and include irrelevant
information
Less than half of the evidence
in the body paragraphs
supports the claims In the topic
sentences.

Pieces of evidence are


ordered haphazardly without
consideration of logical
connections.
Few transition words or
phrases are used, or they are
used incorrectly.

Mostly relevant evidence


provided, but not specific or
detailed enough

Evidence is not provided or is


frequently not relevant or not
precise

Some variation in evidence but


drawn from two or fewer sources
in many paragraphs

Over-reliance on one type


of evidence or on a few key
sources

Evidence is introduced in a

No context or background is

1 can Integrate evidence


and quotations into
my writing, avoiding
plagiarism

Analysis/ Critical
Thinking and
Reasoning
1 can analyze the
strengths and
weaknesses of sources
and draw insightful
conclusions.

Style (Voice, syntax


and diction)
1 can use a formal style
and objective tone to
discuss my research

building credibility of source

context is provided

formulaic or incomplete manner

provided for evidence

There is clear distinction between


quotes, paraphrase, and writer's own
words.

There is clear distinction between


quotes, paraphrase, and writer's own
words.

Occasionally it is difficult to tell


what is direct quote, paraphrase,
or writer's own words

There is some confusion


about what is direct quote,
paraphrase, or writer's own
words

Provides convincing explanation of how


evidence supports claims

Provides reasonable explanation of


how evidence supports claims

Provides illogical or insufficient


explanation of how evidence
supports claims.

Consistently includes insightful critical


thinking that weighs strengths and
weaknesses of evidence and draws
logical conclusions

Includes critical thinking that evaluates


information and draws mostly logical
conclusions

Provides simplistic,
underdeveloped, or
occasionally illogical explanation
of how evidence supports claims

Engaging yet objective tone

Academic and formal tone without


use of personal pronouns or informal
vocabulary

Somewhat informal,
inconsistent, or overly emotional
tone

Effective variety of sentence structures

Some varied sentence structure,


but too many simple sentences

Awkward syntax and/


or phrasing taxes reader
comprehension

Somewhat informal, vague, or


elementary word choices

Repetitive and simplistic


sentence structure

Purposeful variety of sentence


structures
Precise choice of scholarly and vivid
words

Includes little critical thinking,


and instead paraphrases or
summarizes the texts

Includes no critical thinking or


inferences about the texts

Tone is inappropriate for


audience/purpose

Purposeful choice of formal words

Inaccurate, basic, and/or casual


word choices
Conventions/
Mechanics
1 can revise my writing so
that it is stylistically and
grammatically correct

MLA style used for citation, page


formatting, and works cited page when
applicable.
No spelling, punctuation or grammatical
errors
No run ons, comma splices or sentence
fragments

Bibliography
1 can follow the standard
format for bibliographical
entries and annotations

All sources are correctly cited according


to MLA guidelines, including alphabetical
order, sequence of information,
completeness of infonnation, and indenting.

Sources are consistently cited in MLA,


with few errors.

Sources are mostly cited but


with frequent errors in MLA

No attempt is made to cite


sources.

No more than three spelling,


punctuation and grammatical errors.

Errors in spelling, punctuation,


and grammar distract reader.

Errors in spelling, punctuation,


and grammar confuse reader.

Occasional run ons, comma splices, or


sentence fragments

Some run ons, comma splices,


or sentence fragments

Frequent run ons, comma


splices, or fragments

The majority of the sources are correctly


cited according to MLA guidelines but may
have a few mistakes in alphabetization and/
or indenting.

Some sources are correctly cited


according to MLA guidelines but
many contain mistakes in one or
more criteria.

Few sources correctly follow


MLA guidelines.

Presentation Rubric: Senior Expedition


Student:
Category
Organization

Reviewer:
(4)
The argument
is nuanced and
perceptive and
is consistently
developed
throughout
presentation
All the evidence
clearly and
persuasively
supports each claim.
Logical and
purposeful
progression of
ideas throughout
presentation with
smooth transitions

Evidence
and Critical
Reasoning

Substantial,
relevant, and
convincing evidence
provided to support
each claim.
Wide variety of
facts, statistics,
testimony, and
anecdotes from
a variety of
authoritative
sources.
Detailed
information from
two experts and
fieldwork are
smoothly integrated
into argument.
Presenter provides
compelling insight
into significance
of evidence and
demonstrates

Date:
(3)

(2)

(1)

The argument is
clear and insightful
and is developed
through most of the
presentation

The argument is clear


but overly simplistic,
the evidence doesn't
consistently support
the thesis

The argument isn't


clearly stated and
the sub-topics have
little relevance to
the main argument

Almost all of the


evidence clearly
supports the
speaker's claims.

Most (75%) of the


evidence matches the
speaker's claims.

Less than half of the


evidence matches
the speaker's claims

Main ideas are


ordered logically but
frequent illogical
ordering supporting
details

Ideas and evidence


are ordered
haphazardly without
consideration of
logical connections

Specific, relevant,
and trustworthy
evidence provided to
support claims

Mostly relevant
evidence provided
but not specific or
detailed enough.

Little evidence is
provided to support
claims or evidence
is often irrelevant or
not trustworthy.

Variety of types
of evidence with
multiple sources
used to support each
claim.

Some variation in
types of evidence,
but often over-relies
on a few key sources
or sometimes uses
sources that aren't
credible.

Frequently relies
on too few sources
or frequently uses
sources that are not
credible

Two experts and


onefieldworkare
described but not
incorporated

Two experts and


fieldwork are
minimally described
but don't contribute
meaningfully to
research

Mostly logical
and purposeful
progression of main
ideas and evidence
throughout the
presentation

Information from
two experts and
fieldwork is used
as important and
meaningful evidence
for claims.
Presenter clearly
explains how
evidence supports
claims and is
comfortable fielding
questions about each
part of presentation.

Presenter often
explains how
evidence supports
claims but is only
able to answer basic
questions.

Presenter is often
unable to explain
how the evidence
supports claims or
answer questions
well

command of
the material in
answering questions
Communication

Presenter speaks
loudly,
clearly, and
expressively with
purposeful pacing
Presenter uses
formal dress,
body language,
gestures, and eye
contact to express
a commanding
confidence and
enthusiasm
Presenter uses
visual aides
and interactive
elements that
enhance audience
engagement with
their research
Product creatively
engages a fitting
audience clearly
achieving a realworld purpose
while conveying
significant,
compelling
information from
research

Presenter speaks
loudly and clearly
enough for panel to
follow easily

Presenter mostly
speaks clearly,
but occasionally
mumbles or rushes

Presenter uses
formal dress, body
language, gestures,
and eye contact to
convey confidence
and engagement

Body language
and gestures are
occasionally
distracting. Presenter
sometimes relies too
much on the screen.

Presenter uses
visual aides and
interactive elements
purposefully to
illustrate important
ideas

Visual aides
sometimes contribute
purposefully
but sometimes
are distracting
or irrelevant to
argument.

Product engages
an authentic
audience with a
clear purpose while
communicating
important
information from
research

There is a mismatch
between the product
and the audience and/
or the product is only
somewhat effective in
achieving its purpose

Presenters' pace and


volume frequently
distract from
the ideas of the
presentation.
Body language/
gestures
communicate lack
of engagement with
topic.
Presenter makes
little eye-contact
Visual aides detract
from the overall
presentation
The product is of
poor quality and
doesn't serve a
meaningful purpose
with an authentic
audience

Senior Expedition Presentation


Thank you for serving as a panelist for this year's Senior Expedition. The seniors have worked hard to
find out about their topic, synthesize information, develop an argument, write a paper, and figure out how
to present their research effectively. Your role as a panelist is to serve as a supportive audience, evaluate
the quality of their work, and communicate honest, constructive feedback to students. Each panel will
follow the same structure:

s-\

1. Student Reflection on Identity as Learner at CCPCS (5 minutes)


2. Presentation of Research (40-50 minutes)
3. Student Reflection on Expedition/Next Steps/Future Plans (5 minutes)

4. Question and Answer Session (10 minutes)


5. Panel Deliberation and Feedback (10 minutes)
Students must earn an average of 2.5 or higher on the three rubric criteria (Organization, Evidence
and Reasoning, and Communication) in order to pass their presentation. When evaluating students
on the rubric, only consider what you observe during the presentation, not prior experiences or
relationships with students. Additionally, students must meet the following minimum requirements in
order to pass:

/^\

Students must include a five minute reflection on their learning as a Capital City student
Student must present their research for at least 40 minutes and for no more than 50 minutes
Student must provide evidence of two relevant, authoritative expert interviews (outside of
CCPCS)
Student must provide evidence of one relevant, meaningful fieldwork experience
Student must share evidence of their product and explain its purpose, audience, and impact.
Product options included letter-writing campaign, website/social media campaign, internship
application process, leading a 30-60 minute seminar, or a photo-essay about participating in an
activism campaign

When grading presentations, the panelists should reach a consensus on a grade (to the closest half point)
for each of the three rubric criteria (1,1.5, 2,2.5,3,3.5,4). If a consensus cannot be reached AND it
impacts whether a student passes or fails the presentation, call in Pat Coyle for consultation. In all other
cases, reach a consensus.
If a student doesn't pass on his/her first attempt, he/she will be scheduled for one additional attempt
before being scheduled to re-present over the summer.

/S