Grading Scale for Formal Papers
| Argumentation | Structure | Style | Rhetorical Awareness | Mechanics | |
| F | Paper merely parrots one or more sources
without making an argument; paper is partly or wholly plagiarized, or shows minimal effort |
Structure is utterly chaotic,
or is lifted from another source. |
No personal style;
words and sentence structures are borrowed from others |
Paper is inappropriate
for college-level work |
multiple errors
remain uncorrected |
| D | Paper suffers from any of the following:
missing or extremely vague thesis; thesis which is obvious or trivial; severe underdevelopment; serious misrepresentation of the text |
Inappropriate use of a canned structure
such as a chronological survey or a 5-paragraph theme, or the disunity and incoherence often associated with a missing or vague thesis |
language problems are sever enough
that key ideas are incomprehensible; words are egregiously misused, or sentence parts joined illogically |
paper does not fulfill assignment;
egregious misjudgment of audience; purpose is unclear or inappropriate |
even after careful editing,
errors are distracting or obscure meaning |
| C | argument is discernible
but suffers from one or more of the following: argument is stale, though not obvious or trivial; is underdeveloped; or is based upon insufficient or inappropriate evidence |
a plan is evident in the structure but is
only partly brought to a successful conclusion; argument has logical or structural gaps or shifts |
style is understandable
but frequently awkward; sentence structures are unvarying or rhythmless; diction may lapse into inappropriate slang or turgid academese |
some misjudgments of audience;
mildly confused or conflicting sense of purpose; some confusion about assignment |
all major errors are corrected,
but obscure errors remain, leading to occasional awkwardness |
| B | solid, well developed argument;
thinking is original to student but probably not original in the field; good evidence and reasoning support every main claim and most minor ones; ideas are solidly anchored in the text |
unified and coherent argument
in the paper as a whole, perhaps with minor gaps or shifts within local arguments; introduction and conclusion are serviceable |
language is clear but not striking;
paper has a definite voice but lacks the precision and vividness of an "A" paper; occasional but infrequent awkwardness |
clear sense of audience
and purpose; slight miscalculations of tone or needed background |
no errors remain
after editing (final portfolio only) |
| A | An "A" paper contains an original, sophisticated, ambitious
argument, developed thoroughly and persuasively.
Every claim must be supported by excellent reasoning and evidence. References to source material should evince subtle and thorough knowledge and understanding of the points made in those sources |
Explicitly ensure that you have a perfectly unified and coherent argument;
every sentence and paragraph should lead clearly to the next.
Each paragraph should have a clear focus. The introduction and conclusion should be striking, but should also be obvious structural cornerstones for what lies between. |
Establish a consistently intelligent and articulate voice.
Variety and emphasis are then provided through variations in sentence length and construction as well as through careful selection of fresh language which promotes your agenda. |
superb sense of audience
and purpose; highly effective use of background information, tone, diction, counterarguments |
no errors remain
after editing (final portfolio only) |
(Wes Chapman/Gabe Spalding)