Paper Evaluation Rubric
You may use the following guidelines to get a sense of how the research paper will be graded and to understand your particular grade. This rubric is only a guideline. Above all, keep this in mind:
"A good style is, first of all, clear. The proof is that language which does not convey a clear meaning fails to perform the very function of language."
--Aristotle, Rhetoric (Book III:2)
The Superior Paper (A/A-)
Thesis: Easily identifiable, plausible, novel, sophisticated, insightful, crystal clear.
Structure: Evident, understandable, appropriate for thesis. Excellent transitions from point to point. Paragraphs support solid topic sentences.
Use of evidence: Primary source information used to buttress every point with at least one example. Examples support mini-thesis and fit within paragraph. Excellent integration of quoted material into sentences. Excellent integration of secondary sources.
Analysis: Author clearly relates evidence to mini-thesis; analysis is fresh and exciting, posing new ways to think of the material.
Logic and argumentation: All ideas in the paper flow logically; the argument is identifiable, reasonable, and sound. Counterarguments in the historiography are acknowledged and where possible refuted.
Mechanics: Sentence structure, grammar, and diction excellent; correct use of punctuation and citation style; minimal to no spelling errors; absolutely no run-on sentences or awkward constructions; limited or no use of the passive voice.
The Good Paper (B+/B/B-)
Thesis: Promising, but may be slightly unclear, or lacking in insight or originality.
Structure: Generally clear and appropriate, though may wander occasionally. May have a few unclear transitions, or a few paragraphs without strong topic sentences.
Use of evidence: Examples used to support most points. Some evidence does not support point, or may appear where inappropriate. Quotations well integrated into sentences. Above average integration of secondary sources.
Analysis: Evidence often related to mini-thesis, though links perhaps not very clear.
Logic and argumentation: Argument of paper is clear, usually flows logically and makes sense. Some evidence that counter-arguments acknowledged, though perhaps not addressed.
Mechanics: Sentence structure, grammar, and diction strong despite occasional lapses; punctuation and citation style often used correctly. Some (minor) spelling errors; may have a couple of run-on sentences, sentence fragments, or other awkward constructions; a couple of sentences in the passive voice.
The "Need Help" Paper (C+/C/C-)
Thesis: May be unclear (contain many vague terms), appear unoriginal, or offer relatively little that is new; provides little around which to structure the paper.
Structure: Generally unclear, often wanders or jumps around. Few or weak transitions, many paragraphs without topic sentences.
Use of evidence: Examples used to support some points. Points often lack supporting evidence, or evidence used where inappropriate (often because there may be no clear point). Quotes may be poorly integrated into sentences.
Analysis: Quotes appear often without analysis relating them to mini-thesis (or there is a weak mini-thesis to support), or analysis offers nothing beyond the quote. Poor to weak integration of secondary sources.
Logic and argumentation: Logic may often fail, or argument may often be unclear. May not address counter-arguments. May contain logical contradictions.
Mechanics: Problems in sentence structure, grammar, and diction (usually not major). Errors in punctuation, citation style, and spelling. May have several run-on sentences or fragments; more than a couple of sentences are in the passive voice.
The Truly Needy Paper (D+/D/D-)
Thesis: Difficult to identify at all, may be bland restatement of obvious point.
Structure: Unclear, often because thesis is weak or non-existent. Transitions confusing and unclear. Few topic sentences.
Use of evidence: Very few or very weak examples. General failure to support statements, or evidence seems to support no statement. Quotes not integrated into sentences; "plopped in" in improper manner.
Analysis: Very little or very weak attempt to relate evidence to argument; may be no identifiable argument, or no evidence to relate it to. Little or no use of secondary sources.
Logic and argumentation: Ideas do not flow at all, usually because there is no argument to support. Simplistic view of topic; no effort to grasp possible alternative views. Many logical contradictions, or simply too incoherent to determine.
Mechanics: Big problems in sentence structure, grammar, and diction. Frequent major errors in citation style, punctuation, and spelling. May have many run-on sentences and comma splices; abundant use of the passive voice.
The Failing Paper
Shows obviously minimal lack of effort or comprehension of the assignment.
Very difficult to understand owing to major problems with mechanics, structure, and analysis. Has no identifiable thesis or the thesis is utterly incompetent.
Adapted from a internet post by Patrick Rael <prael@polar.Bowdoin.EDU>, " Re: what to say to students", [H-Teach@msu.net], 2 April 1996.