This rubric evaluates argument analysis essays on a 180 point scale across four categories: Content, Focus, and Development (70 points); Structure, Coherence, and Language (80 points); Revision (20 points); and Insight and Risk-Taking (10 points). The rubric provides detailed criteria for evaluating an essay's thesis, premises, evidence, organization, writing, and revisions. Scores are categorized as not enough to assess, needs work, fair, or well done. The rubric aims to comprehensively assess argument analysis essays.
This rubric evaluates argument analysis essays on a 180 point scale across four categories: Content, Focus, and Development (70 points); Structure, Coherence, and Language (80 points); Revision (20 points); and Insight and Risk-Taking (10 points). The rubric provides detailed criteria for evaluating an essay's thesis, premises, evidence, organization, writing, and revisions. Scores are categorized as not enough to assess, needs work, fair, or well done. The rubric aims to comprehensively assess argument analysis essays.
This rubric evaluates argument analysis essays on a 180 point scale across four categories: Content, Focus, and Development (70 points); Structure, Coherence, and Language (80 points); Revision (20 points); and Insight and Risk-Taking (10 points). The rubric provides detailed criteria for evaluating an essay's thesis, premises, evidence, organization, writing, and revisions. Scores are categorized as not enough to assess, needs work, fair, or well done. The rubric aims to comprehensively assess argument analysis essays.
The paper has a clear thesis or primary claim that
draws out a major issue or idea from the article. The paper explains what is significant about the thesis/primary claim or, whats at stake. The paper explains one or more of the underlying assumptions that audiences must buy into in order to accept the authors argument conclusion. [implied premises or warrants] The paper makes argument analysis claims about the source text that can be supported with evidence from the text. [Are there claims about the source text rather than claims about the topic of participatory media? Do the topic sentences or paragraph claims lead toward textual evidence? This criterion is about task.] The paper goes beyond a surface, cursory reading of the text and identifies connections between the arguments more salient premises or reasons. [The writer has made good choices about not just salience of premises but the connections they have to each other. A surface reading is typically a list of points with no developed explanation of why and how things connect.] The textual evidence and its explanation develops the thesis or primary claim to build a relevant case. [builds a robust and complex case, not tangential, not redundant: quality] The paper uses sufficient evidence to develop its generalizations (e.g., details, examples, paraphrases and quotes from the text). [quantity]
Structure, Coherence, and Language (80
points) The paper is structured with a thesis and a preview of the major points. (The thesis is your papers primary claim and the major points are the supporting grounds.) The paper adheres to the preview of the major points laid out in the introduction. Paragraphs are structured by a topic sentence
Welldone (910 points)
that is a subclaim (or, a premise) supporting the
papers primary claim (or, its argument conclusion). The paper makes claims in order of priority rather than in the chronological order of the reading. [avoiding a grocery list] There are transitions connecting paragraphs and sentences to each other and to the primary claim and introductory preview. The paper uses language effectively (such as a consistent use of keywords and pronouns) to show explicit connections among the thesis, preview, and other sections of the paper. Vocabulary and style are appropriate for academic writing. Attention has been paid to issues of mechanics and grammar for standard written English. There are few, if any, errors; and no error causes difficulty for the readers comprehension. The paper follows the MLA style guide and has a works cited page and correct in-text parenthetical documentation.
Revision (20 points)
The paper includes a feedback report indicating revisions and responses to feedback from peer review. The paper shows revision that has accounted for the instructors feedback from the rough draft.
Insight and Risk-Taking (10 points)
The paper demonstrates intellectual risk-taking through providing insight or approaching aspects of the task creatively.
Determining The Distance Learning Educational Atmosphere Factors On The Attitude Toward Mathematics Teaching-Learning Processes During The COVID-19 Pandemic Using Hybrid SEM-ANN
Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal