CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING FORMAL PAPERS
E. P. ALMEIDA
COMMUNICATION PROGRAM
Superior: These papers take a clear position supported logically by extensive, concrete detail. There is
critical interaction with theories and principles in the course through analysis, evaluation, and synthesis.
Supportive detail used for purposes of example and illustration is accurately and appropriately
summarized, paraphrased and quoted. Organization is logical, paragraphs are unified, coherent, and
contain effective topic sentences; transitions are effective. Sentences are mature, varied, and coherent.
Accurate vocabulary and consistent use of standard grammar and mechanics demonstrate an outstanding
communicative mastery.
Above Average: These papers take a clear position supported by moderate but logical detail. There is
critical interaction with course material through analysis, evaluation, and synthesis. Supportive detail
used for purposes of example and illustration is accurately and appropriately summarized, paraphrased
and quoted. Organization is logical, paragraphs are unified, coherent, and contain topic sentences;
transitions are effective. Sentences are varied, and coherent. Accurate vocabulary, standard grammar and
mechanics demonstrate a command of the language.
Average: These papers take a position supported by adequate detail and source material; some
vagueness in example and relationship of sources to argument, or lapses in logic are permissible. Course
material may be used non-critically, may lack variety, or is mostly limited to quotation.
Organization is generally clear; transitions are clear but mechanical. Sentences are correctly constructed
but with little variety; may contain stiff and stilted syntax. Use of source material may fit awkwardly
into the writer’s own text. Command of the language is apparent despite occasional lapses in grammar
and mechanics.
Below Average: In these papers, the position is confused, vague, or uses illogical supporting details.
Course material is misquoted, used out of context, poorly paraphrased, used non
critically, or has an unclear relationship to the argument. The organization is unclear; paragraphs are
incoherent or underdeveloped; transitions are unclear or missing. Sentences lack variety, with some
fragments and run-ons present. Inadequate vocabulary or a surplus of grammatical and mechanical
errors interfere with understanding the writer’s ideas. Inaccurate use of documentation interferes with
the reader’s ability to check sources.
Unsatisfactory: In these papers, the position is missing or confused with a lack of supporting detail or
logic. There may be significant problems in one or more of the following areas: the paper lacks an
apparent knowledge of purpose, is off-task, or non-responsive to the assignment; references to course
material are confusing and unrelated to the argument; the organization lacks clear arrangement with
missing transitions or incoherent paragraphs; sentences are convoluted, monotonous, or
incomprehensible; fused or fragmented sentences rule the paper; inaccurate vocabulary and major errors
cause a lack of communication of the writer’s ideas.