WRITING RUBRIC
St. Catharine College
Student: ______Date:______
Topic:______Course:______
Evaluator ______
Thesis/Topic
4 Superior Topic is very appropriate to assignment.
Topic is very focused.
Thesis is easily identifiable and very clear.
Thesis is insightful and original.
3 Good Topic is mostly appropriate to assignment.
Topic is mostly focused.
Thesis is promising, but may be slightly unclear.
Thesis is slightly lacking in insight or originality
2 Average Topic is somewhat appropriate to assignment.
Topic is somewhat focused may be overly narrow or too broad and diffuse.
Thesis is somewhat unidentifiable and unclear (may contain some vague terms).
Thesis is somewhat lacking in insight and originality but provides some new information
1 Needs Improvement Topic is hardly appropriate to assignment.
Topic is has limited focus.
Thesis is very difficult to identify or very unclear.
Thesis is strongly lacking in insight and originality and
provides minimal new information
0 Poor Topic is not appropriate to assignment.
Topic is completely unfocused.
Thesis is non-existent or unidentifiable.
Thesis is completely lacking in insight and originality
and offers a bland restatement of topic.
Structure
4 Superior All structure (e.g., sections, paragraphs, and
sentences) is clear and cohesive.
All transitions are clear.
Introduction and conclusion are strongly well-
developed.
3 Good Most structure is clear and cohesive.
Most transitions are clear but few paragraphs are
without strong topic sentences.
Introduction and conclusion are well-developed.
2 Average Some structure is clear and cohesive.
Some transitions are clear but some paragraphs are without strong topic sentences.
Introduction and conclusion are somewhat developed.
1 Needs Improvement Much of the structure is very unclear.
Most transitions are confusing and unclear with
many paragraphs lacking a strong topic sentence.
Introduction and conclusion are minimally developed.
0 Poor All structure is very unclear and disorganized.
All transitions are confusing and unclear with all
paragraphs lacking a strong topic sentence.
Introduction and conclusion are not developed.
Evidence
4 Superior All major points are supported with references to
scholarly sources or appropriate sources.
All sources cited are important and/or recent.
Quotations are used sparingly and only for particularly
noteworthy or important statements.
3 Good Most major points are supported with references to
scholarly sources or appropriate
sources.
Most sources cited are important and/or recent, but a
few are old and/or marginally important references.
A few quotations could better be put in the author's
own words.
2 Average Some major points are supported with references to
scholarly sources or appropriate sources.
Some sources cited are important and/or recent, but
many references are old and/or unimportant or
marginally relevant.
Some quotations cited could better be put in the author's own words
1 Needs Improvement Few major points are supported with references or
many references cited from “popular” media or
inappropriate sources (e.g., cites mainly web pages
or popular magazines)
Note: If assignment is on popular media only, this point may not apply.
Few references support statements.
Many quotations are overused and irrelevant to topic
and/or are inaccurate.
0 Poor No major points are supported with references or all
references cited come from “popular” media or inappropriate sources (e.g., cites only web pages or popular magazines).
Note: If assignment is on popular media only, this point may not apply.
Points contain plagiarized material or quotes others'
work without proper use of quotation marks or
references.
No references are cited.
All quotations cited are overused and irrelevant to
topic and/or are inaccurate.
Logic &Argumentation
4 Superior All ideas in the paper flow logically.
Argument is readily identifiable, reasonable, and
sound.
Author includes and successfully defuses counter-
arguments.
Author includes his or her own evaluation of the
evidence with much insight.
3 Good Most ideas in the paper flow logically.
Argument is moderately identifiable and makes
sense.
Author includes, and sometimes successfully
defuses, counter-arguments.
Author includes his or her own evaluation of the
evidence with some insight.
2 Average Some ideas in the paper flow logically.
Argument is somewhat identifiable and generally
reasonable.
Author includes, but does not defuse, counter-
arguments.
Author provides few insightful connections.
1 Needs Improvement Few ideas in the paper flow logically.
Argument is unclear.
Author does not include or defuse counter-
arguments.
Author does not provide insightful connections
0 Poor No idea in the paper flows logically.
No argument is presented to support.
Author shows no effort to grasp possible alternative
views or counter-arguments.
Author provides a simplistic view of topic and does
not provide insightful connections.
Mechanics
4 Superior Author does not use redundant words.
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction are
excellent.
Paper contains minimal to no errors in punctuation,
spelling, and scientific notation.
3 Good Author uses only few redundant words.
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction are strong
with few problems.
Paper contains some minor errors in punctuation,
spelling, and scientific notation.
2 Average Author uses some redundant words.
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction are
somewhat strong but with some problems.
Paper contains frequent minor errors in punctuation,
spelling, and scientific notation.
1 Needs Improvement Author uses many redundant words.
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction are weak
with many problems.
Paper contains moderate errors in punctuation, spelling, and scientific notation.
0 Poor Author uses mostly redundant words.
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction are very
weak, with many major problems.
Paper contains major errors in punctuation, spelling,
and scientific notation.
Total Score:______/20 Percentage:______Grade:______
Revised 3/30/07 djc