English 201 Evaluation: Assessment Grid
FORMAL PAPERS and PROJECTS

Your Name:
Paper#. Draft#. Date. #Words:
Excellent
5 (A) / Good
4 (B) / Adequate
3 (C) / Weak
2 (D) / Unacceptable
0-1 (F)
1. Academic/Workplace Skills:
2. Audience, Purpose, Title, Introduction
3. Content Selection and Focus
4. Content Development
5. Organization
6. Language and Voice
7. Use of literary evidence
8. Secondary research
9. Documentation
10. Copy-editing
Overall: (“Pass” or “No Pass”: See calendar for “revision opportunities”—see above for detailed evaluation. Below, highlighting shows areas to work on for improvement.)

1. Academic/Workplace Skills:

  • Excellent to goodmeets deadline, copies ready for workshop, cover sheet used – all instructions followed (topic, research, documentation, #pages/words, writing process) – correct format (headings, margins, font), shows skill in following and completing the writing process.
  • Adequate to weakneeds work in some or several of the areas above – essay analysis incomplete

2. Audience, Purpose, Title, Introduction:

  • Excellent to good specific audience and clear purpose from the get-go –interesting, relevant, appropriate title makes the reader want to read the essay – title is correctly placed and follows punctuation rules –title clarifies the content, both topic and purpose – introduction follows suggestions in Barnet, is of appropriate length and content, helps gain reader’s attention, and leads to a clear thesis statement
  • Adequate to weak audience too general/amorphous or purpose unclear – no title/generic title or rules of titling ignored – title does not clarify content or purpose of essay – introduction does not follow Barnet suggestions– introductory paragraphs lacks sense of where the paper is going (thesis statement) – thesis is too long or too short or doesn’t address essay’s reader and/or purpose

3. Content Selection and Focus: Clarity, Coherence/Unity, Creativity

  • Excellent to good clear, original, creative, challenging, thoughtful idea addresses the assignment and answers good “how” and “why” questions – shows college-level critical and creative thinking – is worth reading – clear thesis (controlling or central idea) offers something new, imaginative – supporting paragraphs are clearly relevant to the thesis– essay doesn’t include irrelevancies but remains focused on topic from beginning to end, with smooth flow provided by effective focus and transitions
  • Adequate to weaktoo broadly or too narrowly focused – repeats ideas from books or class without adding anything new – generic or uninteresting idea – is like a report or encyclopedia summary rather than an answer to a critical-thinking question – essay drifts from thesis and focus shifts within paragraphs – contains irrelevanciesor veers ineffectively from main idea

4. Content Development: Clarity and Responsibility in Use of Evidence/Reasoning

  • Excellent to good ideas fully, clearly, succinctly, responsibly explained – topic analyzed, including discussion of why main idea is significant –development is thoughtful and original, with adequate, accurate evidence (specifics such as facts, details, and examples) and clearly and effectively reasoned argument – discussion is logical: supporting sentences and paragraphs show logical train of thought – reader’s understanding of the main idea is advanced by the quality of the development – the essay makes sense - the APEx method of introducing and explaining quoted, summarized, or paraphrased information is used well, including providing attribution where needed
  • Adequate to weak ideas are asserted but not discussed clearly or adequately – it is not clear how the ideas are important – the reader is left to draw conclusions with no or little help from the writer – quotations are left to stand by themselves, with little introduction and/or explanation –reader is confused about how the essay advances the thesis – discussion may be more or less illogical, with overgeneralizations, hasty conclusions, non sequiturs, or other logical fallacies clouding the reader’s comprehension – development may lack analysis, with too much summary or quotation, not enough independent analysis or original thought

5. Organization:

  • Excellent to good clear overall structure – ideas lead in logical order from one to another, with few or no gaps in reasoning –paragraphs have clear topic sentences, with one idea per paragraph–essay is well introduced and concluded –sequence of ideas in and between sentences and paragraphs is logical and smooth – there is continuity and flow (train of thought enhanced by effective sequencing) – transitions show logical connections
  • Adequate to weak no clear, easy-to-follow, or logical overall structure – sequence of points stated in thesis is not followed in the sequence of paragraphs of the essay –there may be excessively long paragraphs with multiple ideas – individual paragraphs may lack clear topic sentences to clarify sequence of points

6. Language and Voice:

  • Excellent to goodindividual sentences are clear and easy to understand – words and phrases(diction) arewell-chosen: clear, accurate, precise, vivid, mature, effective for reader and purpose, and appropriate to writer’s projected voice/persona – sentence structure/length varies and parallel construction is used well and appropriately – sentences are robust and muscular - transitions between sentences and ideas are effective to create a smooth flow of thought – writing is concise
  • Adequate to weak individual sentences may be confusing, unclear, hard to read or figure out – vocabulary may be shallow or inappropriate (e.g., thesaurus driven) – distinct voice may be absent, may shift unnecessarily, or may not seem genuine – statements may be wordy or flabby with excess verbiage – sentences may be choppy or unnecessarily repetitive in structure – writer seems to be struggling with expression and communication of ideas

7. Use of literary evidence

  • Excellent to good literary text grounds the essay – short passages from the text are quoted to illustrate points in the argument – long block quotes are set off and used sparingly –writer introduces and explains all quoted material so that is it clear why the passage is being quoted, and quoted material is smoothly and correctly incorporated into the writer’s sentences – APEx is used effectively
  • Adequate to weak writer does not use literary evidence, quotes no passages, or quotes excessively (in length and frequency) without full explanation – APEX is not used, or inadequately – long, set-off passages are quoted with no introduction, explanation, or connection to thesis – quotations may be awkwardly incorporated into the writer’s sentences or even left to stand alone

8. Secondary Research

  • Excellent to good reliable, credible, and scholarly secondary sources develop or support the writer’s own argument – these sources are appropriate to the essay topic and incorporated in a way that contributes to the force and effectiveness of the argument – attribution is used effectively (names of sources and their credentials or expertise in the subject are provided as part of the introduction to quoted passages, summaries, or paraphrases)
  • Adequate to weak sources are too generic or unreliable – sources may not be well suited to the topic or may be added in just to have a source – attribution is not given at all or may be provided awkwardly– sources are overly relied on to the detriment of development of the writer’s own thoughts and explanations

9. Documentation:

  • Excellent to good demonstrates skill in university-level research and documentation: alphabetized Works Cited list provided, with few to no mistakes in MLA documentation style throughout – follows directions on type/number of items to be researched/cited – demonstrates integrity and scholarship, with adequate and effective research process and full and clear credit to all sources – APEx formula is applied well – page references and quotations (poetry and prose) are accurate
  • Adequate to weak there is no Works Cited list or it is inaccurate or incomplete – material is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized with some but inadequate parenthetical citation– page numbers may be missing or poetic form violated – no consistent attempt to apply the APEx formula or provide type and number of items as required –Plagiarism automatic “F” on paper/project (other penalties may apply)

10. Copy-Editing (Cf. “Editors’ Proofreading Abbreviations, Marks, Remarks”). NW=needs work)

  • Excellent to good few to no mistakes in spelling, usage, grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and so on – mistakes that do appear are not distracting from the content – the paper is easy to read, clean, and professional looking – edits may appear on copy for evaluation, but these are not confusing or distracting
  • Adequate to weak may have distracting and/or frequent mistakes (e.g., its/it’s) or serious grammatical faults – author may seem unskilled, careless, or not dedicated as a writer-in-training

EDITORS’ PROOFREADING ABBREVIATIONS, MARKS, AND REMARKS
(Marks may not appear on Webpage because symbols are unavailable.)
cap/caps / A capital letter is needed ( ≡ ) or not needed ( ∕ ).
Close up the spacing – no space is needed here.
combine / Connect or combine these sentences into one sentence to show the complexity of your thinking; reconstruct this new sentence to show the connections between ideas, and eliminate unnecessary words.
CS / This is an inappropriate comma spliceyou have used a comma to connect (“splice together”) two independent clauses, but a comma alone cannot do this work. Connect your sentences with a semicolon with or without a transitional device, or add a coordinator (SONYFAB) to the right of your comma, or separate the two sentences with a period.
cons / Consistency. Check for needless shift in person, number, tense, or voice. (See also “shift”)
dm / dangler / This is a dangling modifier. Correct it by making sure you have in your sentence a word that could be doing the action indicated by the verbal in this dangler.
ﻮ / Delete sign. A loop with a tail means that whatever the tail has crossed (word, phrase, word part) is not needed. Delete it.
dev / Develop this section. It needs more supporting detail, examples, and/or explanation to make your point clear and convincing and to help the reader understand what you mean. Be specific; show your knowledge. Be sure your statements can be supported and then use evidence to prove them. (See also ?.)
diction / Diction refers to word choice. See WC (word choice) and WW (wrong word) below. Also refer to elements of conciseness and the following areas: red (redundant), rep (unnecessary repetition), wdy (wordy).
foc / focus / You’ve wandered away from your topic or thesis. Stay focused on what you said you were going to discuss (or change your thesis or topic sentence to accommodate the new materials). Work on unity and coherence.
frag / This is an inappropriate fragment, a piece of a sentence punctuated as though it were a complete sentence. Some fragments are clear and rhetorically effective; this fragment seems ineffective or confusing.
h /  / / Humor: Something you wrote here made me smile, grin, chuckle, or laugh. I enjoyed the humor in this part. I usually can tell if the humor is inappropriate and in such a case will give you another message.
inc / Incomplete. Something is missing.
^ ˇ / Insert something needed here. Often, I will offer a suggestion about what you need to insert in the space to which the caret sign points.
K / Awkward: the expression or the sentence syntax is strange, not idiomatic. The effect is jarring and confusing.
log / logic / This statement or section has alogic problem as written. Check your reasoning, and don’t leave gaps in thinking since your reader cannot read your mind. Correct your work if you have a non sequitur (a statement “does not follow” logically from the preceding material) or logical fallacy (e.g., post hoc ergo propter hoc). Overgeneralizations, hasty conclusions, and other flaws in development (errors in the use of evidence) make writing seem illogical and ill informed.
mm / mod / This is a misplaced modifier. Correct it by placing the modifying word or phrase close to the word that could be doing the action it indicates.
¶ / You need a new paragraph (¶) here because you have shifted to a different topic. (No ¶: this means you should not space for a new paragraph here because you are still addressing the same topic.)
// / Parallel lines mean that the sentence or sentence part to the right or left of the lines needs to be corrected to apply the rules of parallel construction. Larger-structure parallelism problems will be noted with a comment.
+ / + / A plus mark means that you have written something here that I find compelling, interesting, moving, well written, particularly appropriate or powerful, or just plain beautiful.
P / Your punctuation needs correction here, including punctuating titles of literary works.
pro /
pro agr / pro ref / / There is an error in pronoun usage. (1) Pronoun reference clarity (pro ref), is usually caused by sloppy use of the pronouns it, which, this, that, they, them: replace these pronouns with a clear noun, or put them close to the word to which they refer. (2) Pronoun agreement: pronouns must agree in number and gender with the words to which they refer. (3) Other pronoun usage example: Don’t use “that” when referring to human beings because the word “that” is a de-humanizer; instead use “who” or “whom.”
? | mng? / Question: what do you mean here? I’m confused—an example, more detail, or more precise See dev, WC, WW.
red / Redundant. You have used a word that is unnecessary because you already have the information in another word in this section. (See also wdy: wordy)
rep / Repetitious. You don’t need to repeat yourself here; the repetition does not seem effective to me here. Get rid of excess verbiage, which is clouding your point. (See also wdy: wordy)
RO / This is a run-onyou have written two independent clauses without any punctuation to distinguish them. (See also CS.)
shift / Check for needless shift in person (pronoun mode shifting from you to me to them without reason), number (shift from plural to singular or singular to plural without cause), tense (shift from past to present tense, for example, without reason), or voice (shift from active to ineffective passive voice).
sp / There’s a spelling error here. Remember to use spell-check programs, and refer to your dictionary to be sure that you don’t have a word that is correctly spelled but wrong for your sentence (See WW).
S-V / Subject-Verb agreement error. If the subject in grammatically singular, the verb must also be singular; a plural subject requires a plural verb.
syn / syntax / The structure of your sentence needs repair. There is something ungrammatical or strange about the syntax. There may be a syntactical jam because you omitted something or changed structures midway without rechecking. (See also K.)
tense / vb / verb / The tense of your verb here is incorrect. Remember to apply the rule of the “eternal literary present” whenever you write about the facts of a literary work—its theme, characters, plot points, and so forth. (May also use verb or vb.)
trans / Transition. You need a transition word, phrase, or sentence to help your reader understand the logical connection between one sentence or segment of your writing and the one that immediately follows and precedes it.
Transpose. Reverse the order of letters or words. Example: We wanted a gril (if you really mean “girl”).
WC / Word Choice. Check your word choice here. It looks like either you need a clearer, more accurate, more precise, or more vivid word or phrase here—or the word(s) you chose are confusing to the reader (see also ?).
WW / Wrong Word. You have chosen the wrong word here. This signal usually is given if you have a usage or spelling flaw. Examples: (1) You confused “less” with “fewer.” (1) You used “there” when I think you really mean “their.” Spell-check programs won’t catch the latter example.
wdy / Wordy. Eliminate unnecessary repetition or other verbiage. Choose words with high information content; work on being concise by choosing precise language. See also red, rep

English 201 Evaluation Criteria. Floren.Acknowledgement: Dr. Holly Ordway—MiraCostaCollege. Update: 1/13/2019. Page 1