The writer demonstrates original thought and critical thinking skills. He\/she presents a clear, focused central argument (thesis) and supports it effectively with concrete details, examples, and sound logic. Other authors\u2019 ideas are skillfully paraphrased. Direct quotations are minimal and well-chosen. All sources are relevant and appropriate, and the writer\u2019s ideas are convincing, even for those who disagree with his\/her premise.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n\n \n <\/div>\n 53.4<\/span> <\/span>to >47.4<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nMeets Expectations<\/div>\n The writer presents and supports a clear and focused central argument (thesis), but ideas may not be consistently convincing. Supporting details are relevant and logical but may lack depth. Other authors\u2019 ideas are effectively paraphrased, and direct quotations are minimal. All sources are relevant and appropriate.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 47.4<\/span> <\/span>to >43.2<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nApproaches Expectations<\/div>\n The writer presents a central argument (thesis), but it may be overly general\/broad. He\/she adequately supports the central argument, but supporting points may at times be vague, too obvious, or otherwise unconvincing. The writer makes an effort to paraphrase but at times struggles to express ideas in his\/her own words. The essay lacks interesting details, and\/or not all sources are relevant and appropriate.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 43.2<\/span> <\/span>to >0<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nDoes Not Meet Expectations<\/div>\n The writer\u2019s central argument (thesis) is unclear or missing, and the essay lacks focus. Supporting details are insufficient, not relevant, and\/or not based on sound logic. Attempts to paraphrase do not always reflect understanding. The writer has not used enough sources, and\/or the sources are not all relevant and appropriate.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n \n60<\/span> <\/span>pts
<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n\n\n This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome<\/span><\/span>Organization<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n\n\n\n\n \n <\/div>\n 40<\/span> <\/span>to >35.6<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nExceeds Expectations<\/div>\n The writer demonstrates a clear sense of direction. The paper includes an engaging introduction and conclusion. Paragraphs are unified and arranged in a logical order. Each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that introduces the main idea of that paragraph. The writer smoothly transitions from paragraph to paragraph, showing connections between related ideas. Supporting details within paragraphs are well-organized, and research is well-integrated.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 35.6<\/span> <\/span>to >31.6<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nMeets Expectations<\/div>\n The writer demonstrates a sense of direction. The paper includes a strong introduction and conclusion. Paragraphs are unified and include topic sentences, but they may lack smooth transitions between ideas. The organization of supporting details within paragraphs may need improvement.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 31.6<\/span> <\/span>to >28.8<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nApproaches Expectations<\/div>\n The writer demonstrates some direction and includes an adequate introduction and conclusion, but topic sentences and transitions are weak. The paragraphs show unity, but they are not arranged in any discernable order, and supporting details may not always be well-organized.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 28.8<\/span> <\/span>to >0<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nDoes Not Meet Expectations<\/div>\n The writer demonstrates little or no direction. The introduction and conclusion are weak. It is difficult to identify a single subtopic for each paragraph because paragraphs are not unified and lack clear topic sentences or transitions. The order of body paragraphs seems random, as do the supporting details within them.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n \n40<\/span> <\/span>pts
<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n\n\n This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome<\/span><\/span>Style\/Language<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n\n\n\n\n \n <\/div>\n 40<\/span> <\/span>to >35.6<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nExceeds Expectations<\/div>\n The writer\u2019s tone is confident, engaging, and appropriate for the assignment and\/or the intended audience. The text demonstrates strong vocabulary skills and does not suffer from errors in word choice. The writer expresses ideas concisely, only using as many words as necessary to communicate a point. The writer achieves flow and readability by employing sentence variety successfully.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 35.6<\/span> <\/span>to >31.6<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nMeets Expectations<\/div>\n The writer\u2019s tone is appropriate and effective overall. The text demonstrates good use of vocabulary and contains few (if any) errors in word choice. The writer expresses ideas concisely and clearly most of the time. The writer makes an effort to employ sentence variety.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 31.6<\/span> <\/span>to >28.8<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nApproaches Expectations<\/div>\n The writer\u2019s tone suffers from one or more possible problems. Depending on the assignment, it may be too informal, too personal, not authoritative enough, etc. Numerous sentences suffer from lack of variety, awkward constructions, wordiness, limited vocabulary, and\/or errors in word choice.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n \n <\/div>\n 28.8<\/span> <\/span>to >0<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nDoes Not Meet Expectations<\/div>\n The writer often fails to communicate ideas effectively because the paper suffers from significant problems with tone, language use, and\/or wordiness.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n \n40<\/span> <\/span>pts
<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n\n\n This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome<\/span><\/span>Sentence Structure and Mechanics<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n\n\n\n\n\n \n <\/div>\n 40<\/span> <\/span>to >35.6<\/span><\/span> <\/span>pts<\/span><\/p>\nExceeds Expectations<\/div>\n The writer makes minimal (if any) errors in grammar, spelling, and\/or punctuation. There are no fragments or run-on sentences.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n \n \n | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |