Grading Scale #1:
A= exceptional work, extremely impressive, near flawless in terms of content and presentation, shows
original thought and/or insight. (makes me say “Wow! This is great!”)
B= above the expectations of the assignment, but has room for improvement in terms of content and/or
presentation (makes me say “Nice job. You get it.”)
C= meeting the obligations of the assignment, lacking sufficient attention to content and presentation
(makes me say “Well, you did what I asked but no more. I am a little disappointed in your lack
of effort.”)
D= does not meet obligations of assignment, and lacking sufficient attention to content and presentation
(makes me say “I wonder what is up…did you understand the material or the assignment?”)
F = unacceptable level of effort for the assignment. (makes me say “Wow, you really blew this
off. Bummer.”)
Grade scale:
A = 93-100, A- = 90-92, B+ = 87-89, B = 83-86, B- = 80-82, C+ = 77-79,
C = 73-76, C- = 70-72, D+ = 67-69, D = 63-66, D- = 60-62, F < 60
Grading Scale #2: (Modified version of Anthro. department grading rubric)
Grade=A






Your paper incorporates information from lectures, class readings, and independent
research.
Your argument goes beyond a regurgitation of arguments made in your readings or in
class.
Your paper is sophisticated, insightful, and your argument convincingly and critically
synthesizes the prehistoric and modern examples with theoretical issues to form an
argument that reflects your personal insights.
You have included appropriate background information and data to illustrate and justify
your arguments. Evidence used to support the central topic is rich, detailed and well
chosen.
Your paper is very well written, displays outstanding grammar, spelling and organizational
style.
You have included references both in the text and in the bibliography for ALL the
information that you learned (i.e. everything that is not common knowledge). This includes
information discussed in class. These references should follow the American Antiquity
format found here: http://www.saa.org/Publications/StyleGuide/styFrame.html (open pdf
and go to pp. 14-32.) An abbreviated version is also posted on WebCT.
Grade=B



Your paper is above average, reflecting a good understanding and synthesis of theoretical
and ethnographic resources covered in lectures, assigned readings, and independent
research.
Your paper is well written and displays good grammar, spelling and organizational style.
You have used proper referencing styles (as described above).
Grade=C


Your paper is an average one that recapitulates information correctly from lectures,
assigned readings, and shows minimal independent research.
Your paper has some significant shortcomings including limited research, improper or
insufficient referencing, poor grammar, spelling and organizational style.
Grade=D



Your paper is perfunctory, in that it draws mostly on materials from lectures and assigned
readings, and makes limited use of materials from outside research.
Your paper has numerous errors in information (e.g. misidentifying authors, people, and
places, misspellings, misrepresentations).
The ideas, arguments, theories, etc. that you portray are confused, or are not clearly
represented so as to make your position explicit on first reading.

The paper is poorly written, displaying numerous mistakes in grammar and spelling, and
poor organization.
Grade=F

Your paper is riddled with error, very poorly written, and simply regurgitates information
from the lectures and assigned readings.
Grading scale #3:
Instead of grades, I give performance evaluations. For each assignment I will make it clear what
the goals are and what constitutes excellence. I will use a 1-4 scale:
1 = No evidence of achieving goal. The work was either not done, or done so
poorly that one cannot discern any progress towards achieving the goal.
2 = Approaches goal. The guidelines of the assignment were followed and the
work shows evidence of progress towards meeting the goal. Nevertheless, it may
be unclear, partially incorrect, or reflect misunderstandings.
3 = Meets goal. The work is performed with minimal errors or
misunderstandings, but does not show strong evidence of analytical ability. For
example, it may be more simplistic, literal and descriptive with less analysis,
integration, sophistication or rigor.
4 = Exceeds goal. Performs the task at the level expected of an experienced
professional. There are no significant errors or misunderstandings, the work is
clear and comprehensive, and it demonstrates sophisticated thinking (insight,
analytical ability, integration etc…). It is rare to get a 4.
Grading Scale 4:
Grades will be based on your achievement relative to the six goals identified above. For each of
the goals relevant to the assignment you will be graded on a scale of 0 – 3 as follows:
0 = No evidence of achieving goal. The work was either not done, or done so
poorly that one cannot discern any progress towards achieving the goal.
1 = Approaches goal. The guidelines of the assignment were followed and the
work shows evidence of progress towards meeting the goal. Nevertheless, it may
be unclear, partially incorrect, or reflect misunderstandings.
2 = Meets goal. The work is performed with no errors or misunderstandings, but
does not show strong evidence of analytical ability. For example, it may be more
simplistic, literal and descriptive with less analysis, integration, sophistication or
rigor.
3 = Exceeds goal. Performs the task at the level expected of an experienced
scientist. There are no significant errors or misunderstandings, the work is clear
and comprehensive, and it demonstrates sophisticated thinking (insight, analytical
ability, integration etc…).
These grades correlate loosely to letter grades as follows:
“A” – meets or exceeds most goals (note that it is would be extraordinarily rare to
exceed most goals)
“B” – meets most goals
“C” – Approaches most goals
“F” – No evidence of achieving goals