Rubric 2: Holistic Grading
Superior (A)
A superior paper consistently does all or almost all of the following:
- Thesis: Has an easily identifiable, plausible and original argument. Limits the thesis to a scope appropriate for the nature of the assignment and the evidence presented. Explains the significance of the argument.
- Structure: Has a structure that is evident and understandable, and that relates logically to the argument, which is developed throughout the paper. Transitions well between points or sections.
- Evidence: Is based upon primary and secondary source evidence. Is integrated and analyzed, not simply stated. Demonstrates an understanding of the limitations of its evidence.
- Analysis: Is persuasively argued. Identifies and explains counter-arguments or alternative theories. Demonstrates an understanding of the limitations of the evidence. Ties in to broad themes, ideas or areas of analysis.
- Knowledge: Demonstrates superior understanding of subject matter. Displays nuance in relating particular facts to broader context.
- Mechanics: Sentence structure, grammar and diction are excellent. Correct use of punctuation and citation style. Minimal errors.
Good (B)
A good paper does most or many of the following:
- Thesis: Has a promising if not fully realized thesis, with some insight or originality.
- Structure: Generally clearly structured. Wanders or includes related (but not entirely relevant) arguments. Has unclear transitions but is well organized at the level of the paragraph.
- Use of evidence: Deploys evidence to support most points. Sources chosen are generally relevant and quotes are well integrated into sentences though not always analyzed to their fullest potential.
- Analysis: Acknowledges and explains counter-arguments, even if they are not always fully dispatched. May not fully understand the limitations of the argument being made or completely grasp its importance.
- Knowledge: Demonstrates understanding of the subject matter and relates facts to broader context. Makes connections to broader themes.
- Mechanics: Sentence structure, grammar and diction are strong despite occasional lapses; punctuation and citation style often used correctly. Only minor errors.
Acceptable (C)
An acceptable paper does most or many of the following:
- Thesis: Has a thesis that is vague or unclear, unoriginal or slight.
- Structure: Lacks focus, with weak transitions. Primary argument is repeated without development.
- Use of evidence: Evidence is used, but points often lack supporting evidence, or evidence used inappropriately (often because there may be no clear point). Quotes may be poorly integrated into sentences. Quotes appear often without analysis or analysis offers nothing beyond the quote.
- Analysis: May not address counter-arguments or deals with them hastily. Overstates the evidence in support of its argument. Misses connections to important broader themes and ideas.
- Knowledge: Demonstrates superficial knowledge of the subject, without insight into general themes.
- Mechanics: Poor structure, grammar and diction. Errors in punctuation, citation style and spelling.
Poor (D)
A poor paper consistently does all or almost all of the following:
- Thesis: Difficult to identify, restates obvious point, or is a ridiculous assertion.
- Structure: Unclear, often because thesis is weak or non-existent. Transitions confusing and unclear. Ideas do not flow, usually because there is little argument organizing the paper.
- Use of evidence: Very few or very weak examples. General failure to support statements, or evidence seems to support no statement. Quotes not integrated into sentences. Very little attempt to relate evidence to argument.
- Analysis: Simplistic view of topic; little effort to grasp alternative views. No understanding of limitations of argument or evidence.
- Knowledge: Does not identify general themes or attempt to link to them.
- Mechanics: Big problems in sentence structure, grammar and diction. Frequent major errors in citation style, punctuation and spelling. Run-on sentences and other disorganization.
Holistic Grading Rubric (adapted from Paul Halsall, Fordham University)