Formal Paragraph Performance Rubric
Exceeds the Standard (A/A-)
● Thoughtful and perceptive topic sentence with a clear argument reflecting original thought
● Excellent word choice to advance argument
● Excellent choice of evidence to support argument
● Discussion is analytical, insightful and progressive
● Clear and concise phrasing
● Clear transitions between ideas within discussion (makes good use of adverbial conjunctions)
● At least 3 embedded quotations, no longer than three lines, with clear lead-ins; properly cited in
MLA format
● Paragraph has at least 15 sentences but not more than 20.
● As well as many of “Meets” (see below)
Meets the Standard (B+/B-)
● Topic sentence possesses a clear argument
● May possess some wordiness or awkward phrasing but not so much as to interfere with the
overall meaning
● Well-developed argument that integrates evidence with analysis
● Some elements of analysis though discussion may repeat itself or include summary
● Contains 1-2 direct quotations; adequately embedded and cited
● Clear transitions between ideas in discussion
● Paragraph has at least 15 sentences.
Approaches the Standard (C+/C-)
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Awkwardly phrased thesis topic sentence; argument unclear
Paragraph repeats the main idea rather than developing it
Discussion relies too heavily on summary rather than discussion
Too many wordy and/or awkwardly phrased sentence impacting argument or meaning of
paragraph.
Limited analysis; limited use of evidence
Repetitive word choice and/or phrasing
Paragraph is shorter than 15 sentences, or longer than 20.
Evidence is not cited properly using MLA format and/or is not integrated smoothly into analysis.
Uses the personal pronouns “I” or “you” which do not belong in formal academic writing.
Falls Below the Standard (D+ and below)
● Paragraph is particularly short or undeveloped
● Paragraph appears to have been written very quickly, or may be handwritten.
● Paragraph lacks a topic sentence.
● Poorly chosen or insufficient evidence
● Paragraph is descriptive (plot summary) rather than analytical (possessing an argument).
● Focus and development are erratic
● Connection to thesis is unclear