GWAR HOLISTIC SCORING GUIDE
Each score is based on the following five characteristics:
Tasks: This category refers to what the writer must do: (1) read the passage and
state the author’s main idea in his or her own words, and (2) argue either for or
against the author’s position.
Reasoning: Reasoning refers to how precise the thinking and/or logic is and
includes the author’s ability to connect ideas and support a thesis.
Development: Development refers to how well ideas are explored.
Organization: This category refers to how effectively ideas are organized.
Prose: This label refers to how engaging the writing is as well as how well the prose
flows, including sentence structure, sentence variety, vocabulary, and grammatical
accuracy.
6
Superior
A 6 paper generally has the following characteristics:
Both the paraphrase and the essay are handled fully and thoughtfully with a clear response to the
question.
Thinking is precise and without serious logical flaws, representing analytical reasoning. Transitions are
effective, and critical connections are explored.
Ideas are fully explored with a combination of examples and analysis.
Organization of ideas employs some strategy to help connect ideas, creating fluent discourse.
Prose is engaging and sophisticated, demonstrating superior control of syntax and vocabulary. Paper is
virtually free of errors.
5
Above Average
A 5 paper generally has the following characteristics:
The paraphrase may be slighted but not ignored; the essay clearly responds to the question.
Thinking is essentially free of serious logical flaws and includes some analytical reasoning, though
thinking may occasionally be imprecise. Some minor connections may be implied rather than stated,
but transitions are generally used effectively, and critical connections are explored.
Ideas are explored with examples and some analysis.
Paragraphs may have minor organizational weaknesses, but overall ideas are organized to create a
fluid essay.
Prose employs a variety of sentence types and uses a precise vocabulary to create clear, though perhaps
not sophisticated, discourse. Paper is largely free of errors.
4
Proficient
A 4 paper generally has the following characteristics:
The paraphrase may be slighted but not ignored; the essay responds adequately to the question.
The essay uses some analytical reasoning, but results typically are not as logically precise as the 5 or 6.
Transitions are sometimes missing or not effective, and some critical connections may be unexplored so
that the connections tying ideas back to the thesis are implied.
Some ideas may be stated or repeated rather than explored, and the development of ideas is commonly
more general than concrete. Papers in this category may be developed by simply adding on examples.
Paragraphs typically have some organizational weakness, but not enough to continually disrupt the
reader.
Though prose may be marginally awkward or imprecise, it employs some sentence variety and uses at
least a basic college-level vocabulary. The paper contains some errors, but they are not distracting.
3
Basic
A paper may be placed in this category if it has any one of the following characteristics:
The paraphrase is misconstrued, mishandled, or ignored, and the essay response is skewed in some
manner.
Thinking is generic, flawed, and imprecise; transitions are missing or ineffective; and critical
connections are unexplored.
Most ideas are sweeping generalities with little or no concrete development; are mostly repeated rather
than explored; and consist of subjective anecdotes with little or no analysis. Like a 4, development is
usually by addition.
Organization has paragraphing and/or overall structural weaknesses that disrupt the essay’s fluency.
Sentence structure and vocabulary are simplistic, redundant, and/or vague, resulting in inexact and
awkward prose. Frequent and sometimes serious errors distract the reader from the content.
2
Substandard
A 2 paper generally has the following characteristics:
Both the paraphrase and the essay response are usually ignored, misconstrued, badly mishandled, or
redefined to accommodate what the writer wants or is able to say.
Thinking is often seriously flawed. Transitions, when used, usually indicate the wrong logical
connection, and critical connections are unexplored, resulting in disjointed reasoning.
Ideas are typically sweeping generalities, repeated with little or no development. Examples, when
present, tend to be personal narrative with no analysis.
A Paper in this category usually demonstrates a variety of structural weaknesses, such as lacking an
overall plan, that seriously disrupt the essay’s meaning.
Vocabulary and sentence structure are typically very weak, making the prose difficult to interpret.
Serious and frequent errors may gravely interfere with readability.
1
Ineffectual
A 1 paper generally has the following characteristics:
Both the paraphrase and the essay response tend to be seriously misconstrued, mishandled, or ignored,
or the paper may fail to deal with the topic altogether.
A combination of logical weaknesses demonstrates serious conceptual confusion.
Ideas are often vague generalizations, marked merely by statement and restatement.
Ideas may lack even a simple organizational plan, creating a seriously disjointed and chaotic essay.
Serious and frequent errors and problems with sentence structure and vocabulary generally render the
paper incomprehensible.
PPA 503 Holistic Scoring Guide (Content)
6 Superior
 Papers or memoranda in this category have a clearly defined problem statement and an
excellent understanding of the importance and implications of the research.
 The author clearly understands the theory or theories, stakeholders, competing problem
definitions, and appropriate political and historical context of the problem.
 The author presents a coherent, detailed analytical process.
 The design or process allows the author to present a coherent argument that directly
addresses the research questions, identifies alternatives, reaches clear conclusions, and
makes directly relevant recommendations.
5 Above Average
 Papers or memoranda in this category may slight, but not ignore, one of the elements of
an excellent paper or memorandum.
 The author has a basic understanding of theory or theories, stakeholders, competing
problem definitions, and appropriate context of the problem.
 The author presents an adequate analytical process, but the process may not provide clear
answers to some questions.
 The argument presented is coherent, but does not clearly address the research questions,
alternatives, conclusions, and recommendations as well as a 6 answer.
4 Proficient
 Papers or memoranda in this category have a clear design, process, and presentation, but
may slight more than one element of an excellent paper or memorandum.
 The author may have some difficulty integrating the theory or theories, stakeholders,
problem definitions, and appropriate context.
 The author has an adequate analytical process, but the process may not provide clear
answers to some questions.
 The author presents an argument that has a clear beginning, middle, and end, but may
have somewhat superficial analyses of the research questions, alternatives, conclusions,
and recommendations.
3 Basic
A paper or memorandum will fall into this category if it has major shortcomings in one of the
elements described above.
 It does not have a clear problem statement.
 It demonstrates a vague understanding of the theory or theories, stakeholders, problem
definitions, and context.
 It fails to develop a coherent analytical process.
 It does not develop a coherent argument linking the research questions, alternatives,
conclusions, and recommendations.
2 Substandard
 A paper or memorandum in this category may fail to come to terms with the problem;
that is, tasks may be ignored, misconstrued, badly mishandled, or redefined to
accommodate what the writer wants to say or is able to say.
 This paper or memorandum contains no theory.
 The paper or memorandum’s analytical process is unclear or absent.
 This paper contains serious errors in reasoning, little or no development of ideas, and few
or no connections between ideas.
1 Ineffectual
 This category is reserved for the paper or memorandum in which conceptual confusion
and disorganization create the impression of incompetence. A paper or memorandum
may also receive a 1 for failing to identify a coherent policy problem.