A General AP-style Rubric

8-9 EFFECTIVE

Answers all parts of the question completely, using specific evidence from the work and showing how that evidence is relevant to the point being made. Demonstrates clear understanding of the work and recognized complexities of attitude or tone. Demonstrates stylistic maturity by an effective command of sentence structure, diction, and organization. Need not be without flaws, but must reveal an ability to choose from and control a wide range of the elements of effective writing.

I can see the house (details finished).

6-7 ADEQUATE

Also accurately answers all parts of the questions, but does so less fully or effectively than essays in the top range. (Discussion of techniques used in passage may be less thorough and less specific.) Well written in an appropriate style, but with less maturity than the top papers. Some lapses in diction or syntax may appear, but demonstrates sufficient control over the elements of composition to present the writer’s ideas clearly.

The house is framed but light is coming through.

5 MID-RANGE

Discusses the Question, but may be simplistic or imprecise. (May attempt to discuss the techniques used in the passage, but may be overly general or vague.) Adequately written, but may demonstrate inconsistent control over the elements of composition. Organization is attempted, but may not be fully realized or particularly effective.

The house is half-framed, half-carpeted.

3-4 INADEQUATE

Attempts to answer the question, but usually does so—either paraphrases inaccurately or without the support of specific evidence. (May confuse the attitude presented in the passage or otherwise misrepresent the passage.) Discussion of techniques may be omitted or inaccurate. Writing may convey the writer’s ideas, but reveals weak control over diction, syntax, or organization. May contain many spelling or grammatical errors. Statements are seldom supported with specific persuasive evidence.

I know you are building something—what is it?

1-2 LITTLE SUCCESS

Fails to respond adequately to the question. May misunderstand the question (or the passage). May fail to discuss the techniques used or otherwise fail to respond adequately to the question. Unacceptably brief or poorly written on several counts. Writing reveals consistent weakness in grammar or other basic elements of composition. Although may make some attempt to answer the question, response has little clarity and only slight, if any, evidence in its support.

You are in the field with a hammer and no clue.

0

On-topic response that receives no credit, such as one that merely repeats the prompt. Illegible handwriting can also be a cause.

—

Indicates a blank response or one that is completely off-topic.

AP Rubric(modified for Pre-AP)

9-8 These papers demonstrate the following:

  • Clear, accurate thesis
  • Sufficient, specific, and accurate evidence with explanation of its link to thesis
  • Thorough discussion
  • Appropriate organization
  • Seamless incorporation of quotations
  • Consistent focus on thesis without a lot of summary
  • Clear expression, direction, varied syntax, exceptional word choice, few grammatical/mechanical errors

7-6 These papers demonstrate the following:

  • Accurate thesis, more vague or general than in the 9-8 papers
  • Specific, accurate but insufficient evidence or less well-chosen evidence
  • Link between evidence and thesis not as evident
  • Less thorough discussion
  • Less clear organization
  • Less fluid incorporation of quotations
  • Inconsistent focus on thesis and/or plot summary
  • Problems with diction, clarity of expression, syntax, and mechanics

5 These papers are thinner versions of the lower range of 7-6 papers, displaying fewer errorsthan those in the 4-3 range, but characterized by shallow or surface-level thought,inadequate development, and simplistic expression.

4-3 These papers demonstrate the following:

  • Vague and/or inaccurate thesis
  • Link to thesis weak or not evident
  • Little discussion/explanation
  • Little, inaccurate, or poorly chosen evidence
  • Unclear, faulty organization
  • Awkward incorporation of quotations
  • Poor development
  • Problems with focus, diction, syntax, mechanics, and expression

2-1 These essays compound the weaknesses of essays in the 4-3 range.