CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING PAPERS
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING PAPERS– Van Noy
The best papers (A)
1. Assignment/Audience: Fulfill the assignment in a fresh,and sophisticated way. Thesis is lively and original, argumentative and perhaps even controversial, sensitive to the texts and its contexts. Accommodate themselves well to the intended audience: scholars or practitioners in some area of English Studies, working against a strong counterargument.
1. Thesis/Purpose: Say something in precise and specific terms. Explore the implications of their own ideas. Contain a stated or implied thesis that connects the ideas, examples and evidence. The purpose(s) of the paper is clear and focused.
2. Organization: Are unified and develop a thesis and/or sustain a line of thought clearly and logically, without unnecessary digressions. Paragraphs are fully developed, with clear topic sentences, and follow naturally from what precedes them; the conclusion reinforces the reader’s confidence in the writer’s control of the argument. Are organized by topics more than by sources.
1. Style: Are written in a style, tone, and level of formality that is appropriate to the topic and audience and is rhetorically effective; use specific language and accomplished sentence structure. Contain few errors by contemporary American Standard English criteria.
1. Citation/Process: Are formatted according to standard conventions. Use MLA notation and Works Cited correctly. Show sound use of evidence and quotation (but no unnecessary lengthy quotations). Demonstrate an understanding of the writing process: invention, drafting, peer review, revision (which may involve reconsidering primary text and or draft).
Good papers (B)
1. Assignment/Audience: Also fulfill the terms of the assignment, but in a way that is more predictable. Are perhaps under-ambitions or logically flawed. Nevertheless, represent a solid understanding of the problem and address the intended audience appropriately. With some revision, especially with more attention to the nuances of the text or more insightful close readings, could probably be an A paper.
1. Thesis/Purpose: Say something, but without the precision and specificity of the best papers; are more general, more dependent on vague, subjective, or undefined terms; do not fully develop arguments or assertions--are less sophisticated as a result. Do not analyze or reflect thoroughly.
2. Organization: Are adequately organized, but not as unified or successful in developing and sustaining a consistent argument or line of thinking. May contain irrelevant material or by guided by research rather than analysis. The introduction and conclusion are clear, but perhaps not as effective as they could be.
1. Style: Are well to adequately written, but not as clear, concise or syntactically smooth and effective as the best papers; may make use of clichéd or trite language. Punctuation, grammar and spelling reveal proficient use of the conventions of edited American English (2-3 errors a page).
2. Citation/Process: Are formatted according to standard conventions. Use MLA notation and Works Cited correctly. Adequate writing process: multiple drafts and revisions.
Less successful papers (C)
1. Assignment/Audience: May not adequately or appropriately fulfill the terms of the assignment. The thesis is too broad or hard to discern. An adequate sense of audience and purpose, but lacks sense of counterargument. Minimal but effective use of secondary sources or evidence. There is little awareness of other points of view.
1. Thesis/Purpose: Say very little: are general and vague, do not develop ideas, provide few specifics. Lack analysis or reflection of the topic. The reasoning is predictable and/or flawed.
2. Organization: Are poorly organized: lack effective unity and focus; do not successfully illustrate a line of thinking or sustain an argument; are weakened by gaps in logic and/or irrelevant material.
1. Style: Are not well written: are unclear and/or awkward; are weakened by an inappropriate level of diction or by mechanical problems. Sentence structure is generally correct, although the writer may show a limited competence with sentence effectiveness. However, gross mechanical errors such as comma splices, unintentional fragments, fused sentences, subject/verb and noun/pronoun agreement—errors that reveal an inadequate understanding of sentence structure—are not present (4-7 errors per page).
1. Citation/Process: Are adequately formatted and designed, and use MLA notation adequately. May be characterized by poor drafts or unwillingness to engage in substantive revision.
D and F papers show the inability to handle the above criteria.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- smsu southwest minnesota state university
- argument analysis and evidence in academic writing in
- 6th grade reading writing argumentative texts unit
- research paper requirements literary topic must be
- criteria for evaluating papers
- pop culture research paper purdue university
- sample syllabus for english 102 cal state la
- english 101 composition rhetoric
- english 102 course description and required elements
Related searches
- criteria for hypertrophy on ekg
- criteria for demand ischemia
- criteria for lvh
- budapest clinical criteria for crps
- budapest criteria for crps 1
- budapest criteria for crps pdf
- minimum voltage criteria for lvh
- models for evaluating innovation
- 5 criteria for evaluating websites
- criteria for evaluating moral theories
- phrases for evaluating an employee
- criteria for evaluating employee performance