| | Grading Rubric for EN200 Paper |
Student Name: |
Course: | EN200 |
Assignment Name: |
Scale | Below 40 | 40-49 | 50-59 | 60-69 | 70-79 | 80-89 | Over 90 |
Criteria | | | | | | | | | Weight | Overall Points | Comments |
1. Content analysis | Little evidence that the student understood the issues involved, with very limited coverage of the relavant issues. Weak arguments, with irrelevant material | Descriptive work. Coverage of some material relevant to the issue, but lacks depth. | Work done competently. Good coverage of the relevant issues, with an ability to produce and integrate arguments relative to those issues. Limited analytical response. . | The task is completed very competently. Analytical approach to the relevant issues, with well reasoned arguments. | Very good quality work, idetifying all relevant issues. High degree of competence when analyzing and developing the material, with a deep understanding of the subject and what was required to do. | Excellent quality work, idetifying all relevant issues. High degree of competence when analyzing and developing the material, with a clear understanding of the subject and the assessed task.Signs of creative originality and critical independent thinking. | Work of outstanding quality. All relevant issues are identified, completely understood and analyzed with originality.Full knowledge is demonstrated. | | 50% | 0 |
2. Organization and structure | Unsatisfactory paper. Little care to present the material in an acceptable and organized way, with many spelling and grammatical mistakes .Lacks structure, and the paper as a whole does not follow a logical flow. | Attempt at organization, though the material is not particularly well structured. There are some spelling or grammatical errors. | Discernible structure. Mostly, the paper is clearly worded, with only few spelling or grammatical errors. The organization of the paper is good, allowing a logical progression. | Clear and well organized structure. Concise and clear wording, with very few minor spelling or grammatical errors. | Very good structure, with an engaging development that allows to follow convincingly all the line argumentation. Virtually no spelling or grammatical errors | Excellent structure, with an engaging development that allows to follow convincingly all the line of argumentation. Virtually no spelling or grammatical errorsThe organization and development of the task engages successfully the reader´s attention throughout the entire paper. | Fluent and extremely well structured work. Impeccable organization, contributing to the cohesiveness and effectiveness of the argumentation throughout the entire paper. Very neatly presented with no mistakes. | | 40% | 0 |
3. Citing and referencing | No citations. | Some citation is present. | Sound sources not properly referenced and incomplete | Sources properly referenced but incomplete | Most sources properly referenced | All sources properly referenced | All sources properly referenced | | 10% | 0 |
|
| | | | | | | | Total Points | | 0 |
* plagiarism = F for assignment! | | | | | | | | Late Penalty | | 0% |
| | | | | | | | Possible Points | | 100 |
| | | | | | | | Grade | | 0.00% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|