ENGL1A
Writer:
Essay #2: Rhetorical Analysis
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Excellent
Good
Introduction, thesis,
and conclusion
Intro provides context for the rest of the
paper; thesis is explicit and clear;
conclusion recasts thesis and provides
cohesion to whole paper
Either intro provides insufficient context
for the rest of the paper, thesis is
lacking in clarity, OR conclusion fails to
recast thesis effectively.
Intro provides little context for the
paper; thesis is implicit and hard to
find; conclusion makes insufficient
reference to thesis
Intro does not provide context for
the paper; thesis is undetectable;
conclusion seems unrelated to the
rest of the paper
Discussion/Analysis
Clear, analytical discussion based on
well-supported and well-selected points
within the texts.
Discussion could be more explicit and
better developed; sufficiently supported
by ideas from the texts are present, but
could be expanded and elaborated on
(not just mentioned or listed).
Discussion is hard to follow or poorly
developed; insufficiently supported by
ideas from the texts.
No connection among texts or no
apparent attempt at developing an
analysis
Maintains focus; provides clear
direction and forecast of discussion.
Focus is good; direction of paper and
connection of ideas is well done.
Organization and
coherence
Quotes (6)
Writing Fluency: Clear,
Concise, Correct
Meets 5 page
requirement (final draft)
Adequate
Poor or Not Completed
Major lapses in analysis; defaults to
summaries and descriptive details
rather than analytical discussion.
Logical sequence of paragraphs;
transition sentences and cohesion
markers used effectively throughout
paper
Sequence of paragraphs is good but
could be improved; some transition
sentences and cohesion markers are
used but could be more effective
Sequence of paragraphs seems to be
out of logical sequence; insufficient
transitions and cohesion markers
Paragraphs seem to be out of order
and haphazard throughout; no
transition sentences or cohesion
markers are used
Balanced presentation of relevant and
legitimate citations that clearly support
a central purpose or argument and
shows a thoughtful, in-depth analysis of
a significant topic. Paper presents
important insights through various
means of citations.
Citations provide reasonable support
for a central purpose or argument and
displays evidence of a basic analysis of
a significant topic. Reader gains some
insights, but argument is
underdeveloped or not well supported
in various areas by the sources.
Citations support a central purpose or
argument, but not always. There is
poor presentation of information, as
citation takes over analysis. There is
over quoting or, for instance, no
support at all in general claims made.
No supportive evidence/citations
used. The information is not well
grounded and there are no insights;
fewer than 5 quotes or none used.
Superior editing – limited errors in
spelling, grammar, word order, word
usage, and punctuation; proper MLA
citation of texts.
Good editing – few errors per page in
spelling, grammar, word usage, and
punctuation; few errors in citations
Careless editing – several errors per
paragraph in spelling, grammar, word
order, word usage, punctuation;
several errors in citations
No editing – many errors throughout
in spelling, grammar, word order,
word usage, punctuation, and
citations
Completed
Not completed
Peer-editing (15% of
final essay grade)
Completed
Not completed
MLA format adhered
Completed
Not Completed
Score:
Comments: