Rhetorical Analysis Essay (Breaux)
Deductions:
o
Late essay
o
Incorrect MLA format
o
Only addresses one op-ed/wrong kind of text
o
Does not include a required section of essay
o
No Works Cited page; wrongly formatted Works Cited
Thesis
&
Rhetorical
Situation
Analysis of
Appeals/
Strategies
&
Evaluation
EXEMPLARY/EXCELLENT
ACCOMPLISHED/GOOD
DEVELOPING/NEEDS
WORK
BEGINNING/WEAK
Thesis is explicit, specific, and clear;
thesis is analytical and comparative in
nature, including purpose/message
and methods
Thesis is lacking in clarity, too
general or specific;
purpose/message or methods
may be missing
Writer provides brief and objective
summary of each op-ed’s argument;
analyzes purpose, audience, and
assumptions thoroughly and logically
Writer provides brief and
objective summary of arguments;
analyzes purpose, audience, and
assumptions but not as
thoroughly
Thesis is implicit and hard to
find; thesis is more position on
issue or summary;
purpose/message and/or
methods may be missing
Thesis is not analytical or
comparative; thesis is
virtually undetectable or
completely missing;
purpose/message and or
methods are missing
Focus is on analysis and evaluation
(not summary or writer’s personal
position on issue); comments on
specific aspects of op-eds; interprets
larger meaning and makes clear and
unique connections between textual
elements and appeals, as well as to
thesis; writer’s analysis of doc’s
rhetorical methods is fully developed
and complex; correctly uses and
covers all rhetorical appeals or
specific persuasive/writing strategies
Interpretation and analysis of opeds are good and mostly
supported but could be improved
in development or complexity;
analysis may focus too narrowly
on just a few aspects of op-eds;
some connections between
elements and appeals could be
clearer; correctly uses and covers
all appeals/specific strategies
Overall evaluation is logical, complex,
and related to op-eds; writer clearly
states which is more effective and
why
Use of
Sources &
Evidence
Organization
&
Coherence
Overall evaluation is logical,
complex, and related to op-eds;
writer clearly states which is more
effective and why
Writer provides summary
lacking in basic argument,
objectivity, or brevity;
addresses audience and/or
purpose but superficially
Incomplete interpretation and
analysis of op-eds; little support
or connections are provided;
analysis of op-eds and appeals
is underdeveloped or overly
simple; overuse of description
or writer’s opinion;
connections between elements
and appeals are often unclear;
some appeals are missing or
used incorrectly;
appeals/strategies may be
implicit but not stated
Overall evaluation is logical,
complex, and related to op-eds;
writer clearly states which is
more effective and why
Summary is not provided, is
too lengthy, or lacks
necessary info; doesn’t
analyze purpose and
audience or has illogical
interpretation
Poor interpretation and
analysis of op-eds; analysis
is not developed with
specific elements of op-eds
related to appeals; overuse
of summary or writer’s
opinion; often hard to find
connections between
elements and appeals and
thesis; some
appeals/strategies are
missing or used incorrectly
Overall evaluation is logical,
complex, and related to opeds; writer clearly states
which is more effective and
why
Correct, appropriate, and varied
integration of textual examples,
including in-text citations; specific,
adequate, and relevant source
information appropriately used as
evidence for thesis; no drop quotes or
forgotten citations
Mostly correct and appropriate
integration of textual examples;
may include one drop quote or
incorrect in-text citation; mostly
adequate and relevant specific
source information used as
evidence for thesis
Many incorrect sentence
structures integrating textual
examples; drop quotes or
forgotten citations; minimal use
or inappropriate use of specific
source evidence; not adequate
or relevant enough with thesis
Pervasive incorrect
sentence structures
integrating textual
examples; no specific
source evidence or no intext citations; examples
from source are all general
or not relevant to thesis
Intro provides context for the rest of
the paper; conclusion makes broader
connections and provides cohesion to
paper
Either intro provides insufficient
context; or conclusion does not
provide adequate connections or
cohesion
Intro provides little context;
and/or conclusion does not
make connections or provide
cohesion to paper; may open or
end abruptly
Intro does not provide
context or is irrelevant to
analysis; and/or conclusion
seems unrelated to paper or
is non-existent
Smooth flow of ideas ordered in
logical sequence that effectively
guides reader; argument is clear
throughout; each paragraph has wellsupported, clearly-stated main point;
topic sentences focus on analysis
related to thesis; effective use of
transitions
Flow of ideas could be more
effectively sequenced; argument is
clear throughout; most
paragraphs have clear and
supported main point; most topic
sentences focus on analysis
related to thesis; transitions are
present but could be improved
Ideas do not always flow in a
logical, cohesive manner;
argument is not always clear;
organization of points needs
work; paragraphs often do not
have clear and supported main
idea; topic sentences often
focus on issue or summary
Sequence of ideas and
paragraphs seems aimless
and haphazard; argument is
often unclear; no or few
transitions present; no topic
sentences or topic
sentences focus entirely on
opinion of theme or points
unrelated to thesis
Engages audience throughout paper;
varied and interesting sentence
Engages audience through most
of the paper; captures but may
Needs more engaging qualities;
mostly one-note or simple
Much difficulty in capturing
or sustaining interest; non-
Style &
Grammar
Grade Range:
structures; tone, point of view, and
word choice are appropriate for
audience and purpose
not sustain interest; varied
sentence structures; POV/
tone/word choice are mostly
appropriate for audience and
purpose
Very few errors in spelling, grammar,
word order, word usage, sentence
structure, and punctuation; very few
typos; excellent use of academic
English
Few errors or typos per page;
very few problems using
academic English
A level
B level
sentence structures or
repetition; tone/POV/word
choice inappropriate for
audience or purpose
varied sentences and overall
simple style; inappropriate
tone/word choice/POV for
audience or purpose
Several errors or typos per
paragraph; meaning of text is
often obstructed by errors
Many errors or typos
throughout paper; meaning
of sentences often difficult
to discern; multitude of
basic grammar errors will
severely lower grade
C level
D to F (not passing)
level