Content |
Structure |
Style |
Mechanics |
|
4.0 (Excellent) |
Topic is
extremely well selected for a college-level audience. Ideas are chosen and developed with excellent insight, unity, and clarity. Thesis provides excellent focus on analysis of topic for length of paper. Support is effective (accurate, relevant, substantial). |
Overall plan
enhances purpose.
Placement of thesis is effective. Division, sequence, and connection of ideas in paragraphs and sentences are very useful and coherent. |
Given purpose
and audience, Point of view (person and tense) is very appropriate. Sentences are very clear, concise, and appropriate. Word choices (tone and level) are very appropriate. Sources are incorporated smoothly and clearly. |
Reader is not disrupted by major or minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, word usage, or MLA documentation and formatting. |
3.0 (Good) |
Topic is
well selected for a college-level audience. Ideas are chosen and developed with good insight, unity, and clarity. Thesis provides good focus on analysis of topic for length of paper. Support is usually effective (accurate, relevant, sufficient). |
Overall plan
assists purpose. Placement of thesis is useful. Division, sequence, and connection of ideas in sentences and paragraphs are usually useful and coherent. |
Point of view
is usually appropriate. Sentences are usually clear, concise, and appropriate. Word choices are usually appropriate. Sources are usually incorporated smoothly and clearly. |
Reader is not disrupted by major errors and rarely by minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, word usage, or MLA documentation and formatting. |
2.0 (Satisfactory) |
Topic is
adequately selected for a college-level audience. Ideas are chosen and developed with adequate insight, unity, and clarity. Thesis provides adequate focus on analysis of topic for length of paper. Support is generally effective (accurate, relevant, adequate). |
Overall plan
adequately matches purpose. Placement of thesis is adequate. Division, sequence, and connection of ideas in paragraphs and sentences are generally useful and coherent. |
Point of view
is generally appropriate. Sentences are generally clear, concise and appropriate. Word choices are generally appropriate. Sources are generally incorporated smoothly and clearly. |
Reader is rarely disrupted by major errors and occasionally by minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, word usage, or MLA documentation and formatting. |
1.0 (Poor) |
Topic is
poorly selected for a college-level audience. Ideas are sometimes not clear or unified or show inadequate clarity. Thesis provides poor focus on analysis of topic for length of paper. Support is sometimes sketchy, irrelevant and/or untrue. |
Overall
plan
is ill-formed. Placement of thesis is weak. Division, sequence, and connection of ideas in paragraphs and sentences are sometimes inadequate or incoherent. |
Point of view
is sometimes inappropriate. Sentences are sometimes unclear and wordy. Word choices are sometimes careless or vague. Sources are sometimes incorporated vaguely or carelessly. |
Reader is sometimes disrupted by major and minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, word usage, or MLA documentation and formatting. |
0.0 (Failure) |
Topic is
poorly selected for a college-level audience. Ideas are often not clear or unified or lack critical thought. Thesis does not exist or match points. Support is often sketchy, irrelevant and/or untrue. |
Overall plan
is not clearly apparent. Division, sequence, and connection of ideas in paragraphs and sentences are often inadequate or incoherent. |
Point of view
is often inappropriate. Sentences are indirect, loosely worded, and unplanned. Word choices are often careless or vague. Sources are often vague, careless, or inappropriately incorporated. |
Reader is often disrupted by major and minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, word usage, or MLA documentation and formatting. |
Return to Giving Comments and Grades
Created: 9 May 1997
Revised: 22 April 2005
Contact Dan Holt for questions about this page.