Sample Grading Rubric Chart

From UCSB English Department Knowledge Base
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to the English Department Knowledge Base at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
The EDKB Wiki is a database that makes available the various interests, talents, and resources of the English Department community. See the Main Page to learn more about the EDKB. The wiki does not offer information on current course offerings, nor is it a comprehensive archive of materials related to all past courses. Visit the English Department home page for this type of information.

Content Organization ¶ Development Style Correctness
A Response to topic is insightful and original. Essay reflects depth of thought. Excellent analysis of reading is evident. Thesis is well-focused. Paragraph sequence is logical; transitions clarify relationships of ideas. Introduction is engaging; conclusion is substantive. Paragraphs are unified and coherent. Ideas are well-developed with significant and persuasive evidence. Relevant quotes are skillfully integrated. Sentences are skillfully constructed, varied, and distinctive. Diction is fresh and precise. Consistent use of standard grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
B Response to topic is thoughtful, and purpose is clear. Close reading is evident. Thesis is focused. Sequence of paragraphs is logical; transitions are generally smooth. Intro is informative; conclusion goes beyond summary. Paragraphs are unified and coherent. Ideas are developed with effective evidence and support. Quotes are generally relevant and well integrated. Sentences are generally concise, varied, and fluent. Few deviations from standard grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
C Response to topic is appropriate but needs more sustained thinking. Essay is not fully developed. Analysis of reading is superficial. Thesis is evident, but may need sharper focus. Organization is apparent but not consistent. Transitions are lacking. Intro and/or conclusion may be weak. Paragraphs are generally developed but have occasional lapses in coherence or unity. Some ideas may be underdeveloped; some key points may need support. Adequate attempt is made to incorporate quotes. Sentences are appropriate but may show little complexity or variety and some awkwardness. Diction is generally clear and idiomatic with occasional vague or inappropriate wording. Occasional comma splices, fragments, misspellings, or other errors.
D Topic is addressed inadequately. Ideas lack development. Understanding of reading is not demonstrated. Thesis is weak. Organization is haphazard; paragraph breaks are illogical. Some paragraphs are repetitive or irrelevant. Intro and conclusion are weak. Paragraphs lack coherence and are often short. Ideas are overly generalized, ramble, and lack supporting details. Quotes are insufficient, excessive, or inaccurate. Awkward sentences obscure train of thought. Diction is vague, repetitive, incorrect, unidiomatic. Excessive slang. Repeated comma splices, fragments, and other serious errors.
F Inappropriate topic. Unacceptable length. Little thought evident. No thesis. No plan or organization evident. Short, undeveloped paragraphs. No transitions. Incoherence. Quotes are inappropriate, inaccurate, or absent. Awkward sentences obscure train of thought. Diction is vague, repetitive, incorrect, unidiomatic. Excessive slang. Serious deviations.
Personal tools
Reports from the Field
Message Boards