Introduction
and Thesis
A- 4 pts
B- 3 pts
C- 2 pts
D- 1 pt
Hook: Includes an engaging and
original hook that piques the
reader’s interest about the
subject, includes more than one
sentence.
Background: Objective, balanced,
and factual background
information that explains the
debate to the reader
Thesis: Strong and persuasive
thesis that states your position
while addressing your audience
and reasoning behind your
thinking (Because Statement).
Interesting/engaging way to
introducing your claims. (In your
own words).
Hook: Includes a hook that
attempts to engage the reader.
Lacks originality.
Background: Includes broad
facts that somewhat attempts to
explain the debate to the reader.
Thesis: States position, partially
persuasive.
Hook: Unengaging hook or
does not include a hook.
The paper begins abruptly.
Background: Not enough
information is presented
and/or is biased.
Thesis: Position is unclear
to the reader. Lacks
persuasive language.
Hook: The paper begins
abruptly.
Background: No information
is presented and/or one side
is presented.
Thesis: No thesis statement
is included. Uses the phrase,
“I think/believe” and/or
”Read on to find out more”
An attempt was made to engage
the reader and introduce your
claims.
Claim needs to be
inferred. Not directly
stated.
No attempt to engage your
reader.
Each claim directly supports and
relates to your thesis statement
and position.
You include at least two claims
but they need to relate to the
thesis in a more direct way.
There is only one claim
and/or claim(s) weakly
relate to your thesis.
Lacks a claim that supports
your thesis statement.
Credibility: The evidence is from
the article but it isn’t properly
cited.
Relevance: The evidence
partially supports the claim.
Sufficient: You have two
supporting details but not
enough text within them.
Credibility: Evidence does
not come from the article
and there was no attempt
to cite.
Relevance: The evidence
does not relate to the
paragraph’s claim.
Sufficient: You have only
one piece of evidence or
support.
Credibility: Evidence is not
credible/no evidence is
presented.
Relevance: Evidence is not
relevant to the topic.
Sufficient: There is not a
sufficient amount of
evidence to support your
claim
You explain the evidence using
weak persuasive language
and/or repetitive language and
there is no clear statement as to
how the evidence directly
relates to supporting your claim.
You explain the evidence
but not clearly enough to
show a relationship to
your claim.
There is no analysis
Claim
There are two solid claims
present.
Supporting
details and
Evidence
Evidence
Analysis
Credibility: Evidence comes
directly from the articles read in
class and is properly cited. “The
article states”
Relevance: The evidence directly
relates and supports the
paragraph’s claim.
Sufficient amount: You have at
least two supporting
details/evidence to support your
claim
Uses strong persuasive language
to explain clearly how the
evidence presented is supportive
of the claim.
More than one sentence is written
to fully explain the connection.
“This shows/proves___because”
Counterargument and
Rebuttal
Only one sentence is written.
You acknowledge the opposing
side’s strongest argument using
clear transitions and evidence
from the article.
You acknowledge an argument
from the opposing side (may not
be the strongest) using some
evidence from the article.
You cited your evidence properly.
An attempt was made to cite.
Your rebuttal uses clear transitions
and explains why your side of the
argument is stronger. “But”
“However” “Contrary to”
A rebuttal is present and
explains why your argument is
stronger. Rebuttal language is
weak.
You use weak or
ineffective persuasive
terms or repetitive
language to show why this
evidence proves your side
of the argument.
Counterargument is
irrelevant.
Rebuttal is not clear and
fails to defend your main
argument.
There is no evidence of an
attempt to use persuasive
words or an argumentative
tone.
There is no counterargument that addresses
the other side.
There is no attempt at a
rebuttal.
Readdresses the initial hook and
circles back to the beginning giving
the reader a sense of completion.
Closing
Statement
Restates the thesis in a new way
while keeping an argumentative
tone
Explains to the reader the benefits
of taking your viewpoint and has
“a call to action” or appeals to the
emotions of your reader.
Conventions
Readdresses the initial hook but
does not come “full circle”.
Wraps up the paper but
does not restate the thesis.
You do not have a closing
statement.
Restates the thesis in a
repetitive manner.
Repeat of the introduction.
Your paper ends abruptly or
includes a “thank you” for
reading my paper, or “I hope
you learned something
new.”
Explains to the reader the
benefits of taking your viewpoint
using somewhat effective
persuasive language.
Provides no closure to the
reader.
Leaves the reader with
unanswered questions.
Concludes effectively without any
loose ends.
Paper is typed with correct
formatting:
*Single-spaced heading
*Double-spaced
*12pt font
Paper is typed with correct
formatting:
*Single-spaced heading
*Double-spaced
*12pt font
Paper is typed with correct
formatting:
*Single-spaced heading
*Double-spaced
*12pt font
Paper is typed with correct
formatting:
*Single-spaced heading
*Double-spaced
*12pt font
Few errors in:
*Capitalization
*Punctuation
*Spelling
*Grammar/word usage
*Paragraphing
*Run-ons or Fragments
Occasional errors in:
*Capitalization
*Punctuation
*Spelling
*Grammar/word usage
*Paragraphing
*Run-ons or Fragments
Frequent errors in:
*Capitalization
*Punctuation
*Spelling
*Grammar/word usage
*Paragraphing
*Run-ons or Fragments
Many errors in:
*Capitalization
*Punctuation
*Spelling
*Grammar/word usage
*Paragraphing
*Run-ons or Fragments
Reader is able to make meaning
easily; errors do not obstruct the
flow of information.
Reader is able to make meaning
with little effort and errors do
not obstruct the flow of
information.
Errors cause the reader to
put for extra effort in
order to make meaning.
Errors cause the reader to
struggle in order to make
meaning.