Art History Teaching Resources



Research Paper Grading RubricProfessor OverdevestA - ExcellentThis paper is exceptionally well written and organizedB - GoodThis paper is well written and organizedC - AcceptableThis paper fulfills the requirements and has a few weaknessesD - PoorThis paper has significant weaknessesE - FailingThis paper fails to fulfill one or more the basic requirementsFormat-title page-correct margin size-meets page requirement-student has clearly seen the work in person-title is always italicized-thesis is in the introduction-student has emailed a pic of themselves with the work-title page-correct margin size-meets page requirement- student has clearly seen the work in person-title is always italicized-thesis is in the introduction-student has emailed a pic of themselves with the work-title page-correct margin size-meets page requirement-student has clearly seen the work in person-title is always italicized-thesis is in the introduction-student has emailed a pic of themselves with the work-may lack a title page-may have incorrect margin size-page requirements may not be met, or are close-student has clearly seen the work in person-title may not be italicized-thesis may not be in the introduction-student has emailed a pic of themselves with the work-lack of title page-incorrect margin size-page requirements not met -little to no evidence of the student having seen the work in person-title isn’t italicized-thesis isn’t in the introduction or is absent-student has not emailed a pic of themselves with the workContent- introduction moves smoothly and coherently to the thesis, which clearly states the paper’s central point-ample evidence of art historical terms or knowledge -thesis is thoroughly and expertly argued with examples-all applicable formal aspects of the work have been thoughtfully and thoroughly addressed-paper has a well-developed balance of formal aspects and original discussion, ideas and/or opinions than a ‘B’ paper- introduction moves smoothly and coherently to the thesis, which is the result of a thoughtful analysis of the work-thesis is well supported with examples-good evidence of art historical terms or knowledge -all applicable formal aspects of the work have been thoughtfully and thoroughly addressed-paper has a well-developed balance of formal aspects original discussion, ideas and/or opinions than a ‘C’ paper-thesis statement is clearly stated in the introduction and is supported with examples throughout the paper-thesis may lack evidence of a thoughtful analysis of the work-evidence of art historical terms or knowledge-all applicable formal aspects of the work are addressed adequately but may be lacking in details-paper has a balance of formal aspects with original discussion, ideas and/or opinions of the student-thesis statement may be to broad, to narrow, or unclear and may not be supported with examples throughout the paper-little evidence of art historical terms or knowledge-relies too heavily on discussion of formal aspects of the work with little original discussion, ideas and/or opinions by the student-does not have a thesis-shows little to no evidence of art historical terms or knowledge-relies much too heavily on formal aspects of the work with little/no discussion by the studentClarity and Style-very few if any grammar issues-logical flow of information- no evidence of monotonous, superfluous, mechanical, or repetitive language-very little/none of the language is informal-each well-developed paragraph has a central topic that relates to the thesis-few grammar issues-logical flow of information- very little of the language is monotonous, mechanical, or repetitive-very little of the language is informal-each well-developed paragraph has a central topic that relates to the thesis-some grammar issues-logical flow of information- some of the language may be monotonous, superfluous, mechanical, or repetitive-little of the language is informal-each paragraph has a central topic that relates to the thesis-unprofessional appearance: wrinkled, ink issues, etc.-many grammar issues-may lack a logical flow of information- language may be monotonous, superfluous, mechanical, or repetitive-language may be informal-paragraphs may lack a central topic-unprofessional appearance: wrinkled, ink issues, etc.-significant grammar issues-lacking a logical flow of information- language is often monotonous, mechanical, superfluous, or repetitive-language is too informal -paragraphs lack a central idea or topicOrganization- introduction and/or conclusion summarizes the main points of the paper and restates the thesis statement-paragraphs use smooth, coherent transition sentences-excellent organization- introduction and/or conclusion summarizes the main points of the paper and restates the thesis statement-paragraphs use smooth, coherent transition sentences-good organization - introduction and/or conclusion summarizes the main points of the paper and restates the thesis statement-paragraphs use transition sentences-evidence of organization- introduction and/or conclusion may not summarize main points-paragraphs may not use transition sentences-little evidence of organization-does not have an introduction and/or conclusion-paragraphs do not use transition sentences-no evidence of organizationProofreading-very few to no type-os and errors-few type-os and errors-some type-os and errors-frequent type-os and errors-significant type-os and errors ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download