Criteria
Strong to Very Good Work
Claim Structure
A Level
Main Claim/Response
Provides a clearly articulated main
claim that represents the overall
point being addressed in the essay.
Establishes an effective road map or
overview of the major sub claims to
be covered in the paper.
Claims are the statements that form
the scaffolding of the paper. A strong
academic paper asserts an
overarching main claim (which
represents the whole argument – a
large, umbrella statement) and the
supporting sub-claims (which
represent the parts of the argument).
Competent Work
Not Competent
B Level
C Level
D/F Level
Provides a claim that represents the
overall point being addressed in the
essay, but the claim is not as specific,
complex or clear as it could be.
Establishes a road map or overview of
the major sub claims to be covered in
the paper.
Provides a general claim but it relies on
overgeneralizations, i.e. “a big problem” or
“many factors” instead of detailing these
specifically. This claim is not as sophisticated
as it needs to be. The road map or overview
is missing or is not effective.
Does not identify the overall claim for
the essay. Makes no attempt to follow
the claim framework or establish a
road map for the paper. Does not
demonstrate an understanding of the
role of the main claim.
Divides main claim into supporting subclaims, but the sub-claims are not as
well-developed as they could be.
Some sub-claims might lack thorough
development. There are occasional
lapses in the sub claim structure, but
overall the essay demonstrates a good
level of control and solid
understanding of claim structures.
Divides the main claim into supporting subclaims, but the sub-claims rely on over
generalized ideas or language and are not
thoroughly developed. The sub claims
generally lack complexity and, as a result, the
argument seems at times misdirected, rote
or superficial. While the essay demonstrates
a general understanding of the role of claims,
control is not maintained throughout.
Does not divide the essay into a logical
pattern of sub claims. Paragraphs are
poorly introduced, often relying of
facts not claims. Paragraphs may open
on points of evidence, which breaks
down the logical structure of the
essay. Does not demonstrate
sufficient understanding of the role of
claims and makes little attempt to
organize material according to the
structural frameworks.
A Level
B Level
C Level
D/F Level
Employs a variety of effective
evidence. Each sub claim section is
developed with multiple sources.
Evidence is effectively integrated
into paragraphs and balanced well
throughout the whole essay. Source
minimums are achieved or
exceeded.
Employs sufficient evidence. Some
sections may be better developed than
others, so parts of the essay lack
balance. However, overall the essay is
developed with multiple sources and
the writer effectively introduces these.
Source minimums are achieved or
exceeded.
Meets the minimum requirement for
evidence and develops some parts of the
essay with multiple sources. However,
numerous parts of the essay are “under
sourced” which results in a lack of
development and undermines the credibility
of the argument. Source minimums are
achieved.
Does not meet minimum criteria for
evidence. Does not develop sub claim
sections with multiple sources.
Evidence is not effectively introduced
or synthesized. Does not demonstrate
competency in using outside sources
effectively or credibly. Source
minimums are not achieved.
A Level
B Level
C Level
D/F Level
Effectively divides main claim into
sub-claims that support one aspect
Sub claims establish a part of the
of the overall issue. Sub claims are
whole argument. The essay should
clearly developed. Each paragraph is
be clearly divided into sub claim
introduced with a sub claim (or a
sections and paragraphs should lead
transitional or directional sub claim)
with claims, not facts or points of
that demonstrate control and an
evidence. Sub claims establish the
excellent understanding of claim
writer’s authorial control and
structures.
maintain the logic and forward
momentum of the argument.
Sub Claims
Evidence/Research
Evidence
Sub claims should be developed
with multiple pieces of evidence. In
each sub claim section, personal
observation/anecdote, expert
opinion, theories or ideas from
scholars should be used to expand
and deepen the discussion.
Reasoning
Reasoning
Reasoning is the presentation of the
writer’s thinking, which is
accomplished through the
elaboration, explanation, and
analysis of both claims and evidence.
Along with thoroughly discussing
and interpreting claims and
evidence, reasoning also
acknowledges and responds to
limitations.
Develops a comprehensive analysis
by offering a perspective that
effectively explores the complexity
of the issue. Reasoning is thorough
and consistent. Conclusions are
logically connected to evidence.
Explores implications and
consequences and acknowledges
and responds to limitations.
Develop a good analysis, but some
reasoning is not clear or thorough
enough. Draws conclusions that are
logically connected to evidence.
Introduces implications and
consequences, but does not explore
them fully. Acknowledges and
responds to limitations where
appropriate but this exploration is not
as consistent as it could be.
Develops a basic analysis that may be more
obvious than nuanced. Reasoning is
underdeveloped at times. Draws logical
conclusions but these are not elaborated
upon. Does not effectively explore
implications and consequences. The
reasoning remains one dimensional and
oversimplified; may be more factual or
“reportish” in nature.
Does not provide effective reasoning.
Material is consistently
underdeveloped in terms of reasoning
and/or is illogical. Makes frequent
overgeneralizations and/or missteps in
logic. Does not demonstrate
competence in reasoning.
Introduction/Conclusion
Context Problem
Response
Establishes a suitable context,
introduces the “problem” and
follows with response/claim.
A Level
Provides a clear and interesting
context, followed by an effective
problem discussion. Response
clearly introduces the claim and all
parts of the introduction work
together to prepare the reader for
the rest of the essay.
Provides an effective closure to the
essay by returning to the central
Returns to c -> p-> r. Effectively
elements of c -> p-> r. Conclusion is
reminds readers of major points and well developed, thoughtful,
significance of argument.
convincing and energetic.
Conclusion
Writing and Citation
Performance
Writing Performance
Pays careful attention to writing
style and punctuation.
Citation Performance
Uses APA style consistently in terms
of attribution, in text citation and
bibliography.
Totals
B Level
C Level
D/F Level
Provides a context and problem, but
may offer too much or too little detail,
which undermines the effectiveness of
the introduction. Response section
introduces the claim and all parts of
the introduction work together to
prepare the reader for the essay
Provides a context, but it is not as effective
as it could be. The problem section is
identifiable, but does not effectively
motivate the reader. The writer does not
effectively manage the elements of the
introduction.
Does not provide an appropriate
context. Problem section is unclear or
cannot be identified. No parts of the
introduction work together. The
opening of the essay is vague,
confusing, and unclear
Provides an effective closure to the
essay by returning to the central
elements of c -> p-> r. The conclusion
lacks some development and energy.
Provides a flat conclusion that leaves an
impression of writer disinterest or fatigue.
Conclusion lacks development.
Conclusion is ineffective in closing the
argument. Demonstrates a lack of
investment and commitment to
argument and is not a competent
effort.
A Level
B Level
C Level
D/F Level
Writing performance is excellent.
Consistently writes in an effective
and sophisticated way. Sentences
are direct and uncluttered; sentence
style is appropriately varied and
sophisticated.
Good writing with some lack of
style/sophistication. However,
Punctuation is consistently correct.
Sentences are generally clear but could
use some “decluttering” and/or variety
to add to overall stylistic effectiveness
of the writing.
Writing is acceptable, but sentences are at
times unclear because of lapses in
punctuation and/or over-complicated
wording (cluttered writing). Writing could be
improved with greater attention to work.
Writing exhibits patterns of usage error (i.e.
making the same punctuation mistake many
times or too many typographical errors), but
overall the writer demonstrates competence.
Exhibits a lack of control over writing.
Excessive errors in punctuation inhibit
meaning and demonstrate a lack of
writing competency or little care and
attention to written work.
Source material is appropriately
contextualized, attributed and cited
with few to no errors in format.
Writer maintains a consistent
documentation style and includes a
correct reference page.
Source material is appropriately
contextualized, attributed and cited.
Although there are a few errors in
format, these do not undermine the
integrity of the citation work. Writer
maintains a consistent documentation
style and includes a reference page..
Source material is not consistently attributed
or contextualized (lack of signal phrasing, for
instance) but is consistently cited. Writer
makes make citation style errors (usually a
consistent pattern of error) and makes some
format errors, but the overall intention to
document properly is clear. Writer includes a
correct works cited/reference page
Source material is not cited correctly.
Frequent errors in attribution,
contextualization and citation
demonstrate a lack of academic
integrity and/or attention to detail..
*Improper citation (as instances of
clear and deliberate plagiarism) will
result in a failing grade and/or referral
to the Honor Council.