FFYS Essay Rubric
FFYS Essay Rubric
Criteria F (Failing) D (Poor) C (Middling) B (Good) A (Excellent)
Comprehensiveness, clarity, and relevance of content
(weight: 20%) No relevant content is included (or the included content is irrelevant). Exposition and/or analysis is confused, incoherent, or grossly in error. The work is sloppy and disorganized. Little relevant content is included, and/or much included content is not relevant. Exposition and analysis suffer from serious lack of clarity, inaccuracy, and/or superficiality. Some relevant content is included, but some important relevant content is missing. Exposition and analysis are present but lack clarity, accuracy, and/or depth. Harmonious composition is absent. Most content is relevant, and/or most relevant content is included. Most ideas are presented clearly and accurately. Most of the work is characterized by a harmonious composition of thesis and specific details. All included content is relevant, and the most relevant content is included. Ideas are presented clearly and accurately. The work is characterized by a harmonious composition of thesis and specific details.
Logical coherence and force of argument
(weight: 20%) Definite, specific theses are absent. Logical progression and/or connections between claims are missing. Little or no reliance on objective evidence is manifest. Important claims are put forth w/out logical support. Presence of definite, specific theses is questionable. Logical support for theses is missing or seriously defective. Subjective claims are often simply stated without logical and/or empirical support. Theses lack clarity and specificity. Arguments are present but at best weakly support theses. Some reliance on subjective opinion in lieu of logic and evidence. Arguments are at best weakly persuasive. Theses are stated with some degree of clarity, and are supported by some logical arguments. Some critical consideration of objections is evident. Arguments and responses to objections are generally persuasive. Theses are stated clearly and supported by logical arguments. Personal beliefs are indistinguishable from objective argumentation. Objections are identified and critically evaluated. Persuasively effective.
Creativity, personal insight, and practical applications.
(weight: 20%) No creativity or personal insight evident. Application to practical issues is absent. Superficial treatment of ideas. No evidence of serious personal engagement with issues. Little creativity or insight evident. Unfocused application of theory to practice. Problems viewed too generally. Reliance on easy answers, lacking serious engagement with problems. Pedestrian treatment of issues w/ little personal insight evident. Vague application to practical issues. Substantial recycling of others’ ideas. Depth of understanding is absent. Some insightful treatment of issues. Good application of theory to practice. Some original expression of ideas and arguments. Some ideas demonstrate creativity and some depth of understanding. Work is characterized by creative and insightful treatment of issues. Natural application of theory to practical issues. Important original expression of ideas. Depth of understanding.
FORM & STYLE:
Formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, appearance, etc.
(weight: 20%) Rife with writing mistakes. Very difficult to read. Formatting instructions ignored. Work appears to have been written without careful attention to style. Numerous writing mistakes. Significant deviation from formatting instructions. Needs extensive editing and more careful proofreading. Several writing mistakes create distractions. Some deviation from formatting instructions. Needs minor proofreading and polishing. Attractive appearance and easy to read. Only a few minor writing errors. Almost all formatting instructions have been followed. Neat and attractive appearance. No writing errors. Pleasurable to read. All formatting instructions have been followed.
Use of scholarly or other resources, properly cited
(weight: 20%) No relevant resources are critically evaluated, effectively incorporated, &/or accurately cited. No serious scholarship is evident. Few relevant sources are critically evaluated, effectively incorporated, &/or accurately cited. Minimal scholarship evident. Some relevant sources are critically evaluated, effectively incorporated, &/or accurately cited. Some scholarship is clearly evident. A number of relevant sources are critically evaluated, effectively incorporated, & accurately cited. Serious and skillful scholarship is evident. A full range of relevant sources are critically evaluated, effectively incorporated, & accurately cited. Thorough and skillful scholarship is evident.