Assignment 2 Grading Rubric

ENGR 1271 Fall 2009 Asst 2 Grading Rubric (Supporting a Premise)
Criterion Unacceptable.
Incorrect or incomprehensible.
Misunderstood what was wanted.
Marginally Acceptable
Needs serious attention.
Acceptable
Average.
Good
Still room for improvement.
Excellent
I would hire this person.
0 points 1 points 2 points 3 points 4 points
Grammar, Style & Format
(neatness, completeness, white space, consistency, balance, spelling & grammar)
Neatness: Sloppy.
→Incomplete.
→Too much or too little white space.
→Inconsistent.
→Lacks balance.
Grammar: Too many spelling or grammatical errors.
Neatness: Some problems.
→Poor use of white space.
→Inconsistent.
→Lacks balance.
Grammar: Many spelling or grammar errors.
Neatness: Room for improvement.
→Sufficient white space.
→Consistent formatting.
→Lacks adequate balance.
Grammar: Few spelling or grammatical errors.
Neatness: No serious problems.
→Good use of white space.
→Consistent formatting.
→Reasonable balance.
Grammar: Only one or two spelling or grammatical errors.
Neatness: clean and appropriate.
White space compliments text and content well.
→Consistent formatting.
→Good balance.
→No spelling or grammatical errors.
Overall Impression Unacceptable answer. Incorrect or incomprehensible. Misunderstood what was wanted. Marginally acceptable. Unsupported claims. Weak explanation. Too vague. I remain unconvinced. Acceptable. Provides an argument but logic or support is unclear or not quite correct. Good. Arguments are logical & valid. Uses science and facts. Easy to read. Excellent. Answers are correct. Provides brief but clear supporting explanations. Im convinced.
Includes at least three reasons (facts, explanations, etc.) that support the premise. Unacceptable answer. Incorrect or incomprehensible. Misunderstood what was wanted. Marginally acceptable arguments. Not clearly written. Hard to follow. Acceptable arguments. Proper length. Fairly clear. In own words. Good arguments. Sentences are a good length (not too long or short). Expresses the essence of the rationales. Reasonably easy to read and follow. Excellent arguments. Clean, clear sentences. Covers the key arguments of the rationale. Uses plain language as far as possible.
Uses at least three different kinds of support (supporting arguments, evidence, authority, explanations, anecdotes) Unacceptable answer. Incorrect or incomprehensible. Misunderstood what was wanted. Marginally acceptable answer. Only one kind, or only one is valid. Acceptable answer. Includes two that are different, and valid. Good answer. Includes three that are different, and valid. Excellent answer. Includes three that are different, and valid. They are distinct and well presented.
Citations Unacceptable answer. Did not provide what was asked for. No citations or references. Marginally acceptable answer. Citations exist, but are badly formatted. Too few citations or references, or ones that are inappropriate. Acceptable answer. Reasonable citations, both in type and number. Includes required information. Some inconsistencies or weak references. Good answer. Reasonable citations, both in type and number. Citation style is consistent. Excellent answer. Reasonable to strong citations, both in type and number. Correct and consistent format (APA, or IEEE, or ACM, …)

Criteria:

  1. Grammar, Style & Format
  2. Overall Impression
  3. 3 Reasons
  4. 3 Forms
  5. Citations
  • tnl/engr/a2-rubric.txt
  • Last modified: 2012/03/29 10:09
  • by 127.0.0.1