Holistic Score

4. Excellent: The paper clearly addresses all aspects of the assignment and has a thoughtful thesis that is developed thoroughly and consistently.   The paper also includes a fully developed, interesting introduction and a strong conclusion, and the body develops the main idea in a sharply focused, coherent fashion that includes the use of appropriate transitions.   The style and tone of the writing are consistent and reflect the standards required of the profession, and the audience is properly and consistently addressed.   The writing reflects the standards of written English and displays almost no errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or mechanics.   The content of the paper is well reasoned and reflects the highest standards of analysis expected in the discipline. Solid independent thinking is evident.   Sources provide excellent, appropriate support for the thesis, and the sources are accurately represented.   The paper also recognizes and admirably addresses other points of view.   Both in-text and bibliographic sources are properly documented.

3. Good:  The paper addresses all aspects of the assignment and has a definite thesis that is well developed.   The writing includes both a satisfactory introduction and conclusion, and the body develops the thesis in a mostly coherent fashion; satisfactory use of transitions.   The style and tone of the writing are mostly consistent and reflect the expectations of the profession, and the paper acceptably addresses the appropriate audience.   The writing reflects the standards of written English but displays a few errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or mechanics.   The content reflects a consistent, thoughtful analysis of the subject, and it satisfactorily meets the standards of the profession.   Independent thinking is present but reflects limited breadth and clarity.   The number of sources is acceptable, and most are solid academic sources. Generally the author’s point of view is accurately portrayed, and the sources appropriately support the thesis. Other points of view are appropriately recognized and  addressed.   In-text and bibliographic citations are generally used correctly.

2. Adequate:   The writing addresses the assignment but may fail to meet all the requirements. Paper

contains a basic organization, but the thesis, introduction, and/or conclusion needs to be developed. The style and tone of the writing are inconsistent, and there is not enough concern for audience. The writing reflects the standards of written English but displays multiple errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or mechanics. The content reflects a lack of thoughtful analysis and a reliance on generalizations and

clichés. Overall lack of independent thinking. Limited number of sources present, and some of them may be either irrelevant or of poor quality. Author’s point of view may not be accurately portrayed, and some sources may not support the thesis. Other points of view need to be developed. Some errors in in-text and bibliographic citations.

1. Limited:  The paper does not address all of the assignment; thesis lacks clarity and focus.   The introduction and conclusion are poorly developed. The body develops the thesis but occasionally wanders from the subject and lacks coherence in spots.   The style and tone of the paper is inconsistent, and little effort is made to write in a professional style or to write for the appropriate audience.   The paper mostly reflects the standards of written English but has a distracting number of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and mechanics.   The content is inconsistent and analysis is flawed; analysis fails to fully satisfy the standards of the profession.   Little evidence of independent thinking exists, and the analysis is often cliché and stereotypic.  Sources are poorly used and many are of questionable academic merit.   Authors are sometimes misrepresented.   Little effort is made to recognize or adequately address other points of view and both in-text and bibliographic citations include numerous errors.

0. Unacceptable: The paper does not sufficiently complete the assignment, and either lacks a thesis or the thesis is inadequately and unclearly stated.   The writing has either poorly developed or no introduction and conclusion, and the body lacks focus and clear purpose.   No concern is given to writing for a specific audience.   The paper consistently fails to meet the standards of written English and has numerous errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and mechanics.   The content is inadequate, and the subject is poorly or illogically reasoned.   No evidence of independent thinking exists, and the analysis is cliché and stereotypic.   Outside sources are either not used or inappropriately used and inadequately cited.