FORM / STYLE FOR AN ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY:

Written pages

Bluebook quantity (S: 4/5/6 L: 3/4/5):      __ Inadequate      __ Adequate    

__ Your handwriting is tough to read.

__ Single lines/leave margins/front&back

__ Please use pen

Introduction

(Thesis)

__ Excellent clear statement /  introduction of main sources.

__ Good statement; clear context and thesis with some source introductions.

__ Adequate statement; intro brief &/or vague; little/no source introduction

__ Inadequate statement; little &/or no context for reader; abrupt assertion.

__ No real thesis; topic discussion.

Organization I

(Logic)

__ Excellent logic / consistent focus; all points linked to the thesis.

__ Good logic; most points are well connected with the thesis.

__ Mostly adequate logic; key points are left vague in relation to the thesis.

__ Poor logic; mostly unclear conclusions are put forth.

__ No logic; only a list of facts.

Organization II

(Paragraphs)

__ Excellent each with fully developed topic sentence/ transitions.

__ Good with some topic sentences well developed &/or well transitioned.

__ Adequate; lacks some proper transitions &/or topic sentences.

__ Poor paragraphs; too long/short; better organize thinking

__ Inadequate; needs work.

Conclusion

(Summation)

__ Beyond thesis restatement to offer larger significance of the topic.

__ Good restatement of the thesis statement; adequate summary.

__ Conclusion doesn’t reconnect with the thesis; weak &/or no summation.

__ Conclusion introduces new points that are not adequately developed.

__ No conclusion provided.

Audience

(College reader)

__ Excellent tone & style for a college level audience not specifically acquainted with the subject.

__ Good tone & style for a college level audience; most concepts & sources are well introduced and explained.

__ Adequate introduction of most points and sources; several need to be better introduced and explained.

__ Incorrect or omitted introduction of concepts & outside sources; too much assumed knowledge.

__ Inadequate; outside reader can’t really follow.

Evidence vs. Assertion

__ Excellent, varied choices with substantial points to affirm assertions.

__ Generally adequate; most assertions are sustained by evidence.

__ Inconsistent &/or too limited use of evidence to argue thesis.

__ Prone to argue by assertion w/o evidence; relies on just giving answers.

__ Incorrect use of evidence.

English mechanics

__ Good strong mechanics with little or no errors.

__ Distracting grammatical errors; you should work on this.

__ Distracting punctuation errors; you should work on this.

__ Distracting spelling errors; you should work on this.

__ Avoid slang in formal papers

 CONTENT / SUBSTANCE FOR AN ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY:

Peripheral vision

__ Demonstrates good thinking “outside the box” (links other topics).

__ Limited demonstration of connection with other course topics.

__ Flawed demonstration of connection with other topics or issues.

__ Responds more to another topic/question than what was chosen.

__ No thinking “outside the box”.

History Tools

__ Excellent introduction & usage

__ Some good usage of history tools

__ Mentioned; weak intro. & usage

__ No mention of history tools

__ Incorrect usage

Reading

“Supplement”

__ Comprehensive & well introduced sources and authors.

__ Some supplemental reading points & authors used; limited effectiveness.

__ Authors not &/or poorly introduced leaving reading comprehension vague

__ Incorrect reference to the assigned reading.

__ No evidence student is reading.

2+ sides

__ Fine demonstration of 2+ sides

__ Adequate demonstration of 2+ sides.

__ Inadequate demonstration of views.

__ Incorrect demonstration of viewpoints.

__ Only one side

“Detective”
(Lecture/text summary)

__ Excellent demonstration of the major lecture points in an innovative fashion; shows excellent preparation.

__ Good restatement of the major lecture points with some well developed; demonstrates good preparation.

__ Adequate restatement of lecture points but little or no development; minimum preparation revealed.

__ Inadequate &/or incorrect demonstration of main lecture points; suggests poor preparation.

__ Appears student lacks adequate notes.

“Philosopher”

(Subtext)

__ Excellent exploration of subtext from lecture and your own analysis.

__ Good inclusion of lecture inquiry points plus original insights.

__ Limited analysis of the sources; little original insight revealed.

__ Inadequate because the reading is largely unexamined.

__ Incorrect / unclear analysis

(Responsible)
“Judge”

(Values, etc)

__ Excellent identification & examination of value(s); makes case for which should prevail in debate

__ Good responsible judgment with standard(s) identified & examined with mostly effective case for its preference

__ Value(s) identified &/or examined but unconvincing why this standard should be preferable to that

__ Inadequate &/or incorrect identification of judgment value(s) leaving the core of the debate unexamined

__ No identification of judgment basis

“Storyteller”

(Drama /Useful)

__ Excellent dramatic prose; some memorable statements; well beyond ornamental to show the useful.

__ Good prose & discussion overall, but lacks depth/drama at points; shows some transition to useful knowledge.

__ Adequate prose but too rigid &/or formulaic at points; thin drama content; narrative storyline sometimes broken.

__ Inadequate; unclear prose that is superficial & difficult to follow; fails to sustain a narrative.

__ Inadequate; restates a string of facts w/o drama.

For next time:

__ If not representative then show otherwise on remaining work

__ For more points next time, show that you know more about the topic.

__ Time factor? More time allotted on remaining work.

__ See me ASAP if you adequately prepared but did poorly

__ Attendance a factor?