No attempt at argumentation

Shows little or no logical organization

Does not answer / match / address prompt

Undeveloped thesis statement; thesis is a fact or question, or is too narrow or too broad to properly address topic

Attempts organization, but lacks paragraph cohesion or transitions between thoughts

Organization of ideas may fail to support initial thesis

Thesis may feel “dropped in” at end of introduction but still manages to create a cohesive argument

Ideas separated into paragraphs which support thesis, but presentation of ideas feels formulaic or fails to move beyond basic five-paragraph theme

Introduction effectively leads to thesis statement

Individual paragraphs all work to reinforce one or more aspects of thesis statement

Transitions between ideas are seamless and effortless

Conclusion references introduction without simply restating it

Paragraph containing thesis is a controlled presentation of information that leads to clear statement of rhetorical purpose and argument

Paper is cohesive, and no paragraphs feel “out of place”

Conclusion moves beyond introduction and offers a new or final thought

Does not consider what the audience may or may not know about this subject

May use only opinionated, inflammatory, or other insulting language to persuade the audience

Writer is composing for her or him self without considering any audience

May address only part of an audience or readership, creating an unbalanced argument

May sometimes use tone that is not appropriate for the audience

May neglect to contextualize or explain evidence to an audience unfamiliar with the information

Uses a tone appropriate for the audience

May use persuasive rhetorical techniques crafted for particular readers, especially those who may be hostile to or indifferent to the subject

Has numerous significant errors that affect understanding of the text

Has systemic problems with phrasing and word choice

Does not meet the minimum requirements in length or format

Has numerous errors that affect understanding of most of the text

Has significant issues with awkward phrasing and word choice

May not meet the minimum requirements in length or format

Has some issues with conventions and mechanics, such as agreement, fragments, and run-on sentences that impede understanding

May have some issues with awkward phrasing and word choice

Meets the minimum requirements in length and format

May have some errors but do not interfere greatly with the text’s meaning

May have a few problems with word choice and phrasing but the draft is clearly written

Meets the minimum requirements in length and format

Is generally clear of grammatical errors

Shows an elevated understanding of phrasing and word choice

Meets (and may exceed) the minimum requirements in length and format

Does not include research from the proper number of primary and/or secondary sources

Does not summarize or quote sources according to appropriate documentation style

Does not include a works cited page; or, includes a works cited page with prohibitive errors

Plagiarizes

Mentions research from some primary/secondary sources, but sources are overall not appropriate for a scholarly essay

Quotes or summarizes sources excessively so that the reader loses author’s voice

Needs more quoting or summarizing of sources to support author’s ideas

Documents sources inconsistently

Includes a works cited page with numerous errors

Uses research from proper number of primary and/or secondary sources, but includes a source that is not appropriate for a scholarly essay

Shows evidence of using the appropriate documentation style to quote or summarize sources

Presents a works cited page that corresponds with sources in essay, but it has a few conspicuous errors

Uses research from proper number of primary and/or secondary sources, and all sources are appropriate for a scholarly essay

Uses the proper documentation style throughout to quote or summarize sources with few errors

Lists all sources in a works cited page that is mostly formatted correctly

Uses research from proper number of primary and/or secondary sources and includes sources that show superior research skills

Consistently uses the proper documentation style to quote or summarize sources while also varying the techniques of integrating the source material

Includes a works cited page that has very few minor errors, if any

Has no specific awareness of the context and complexity of the issue

Uses a reasoning that is completely undermined by logical fallacies; what is presented as evidence is inappropriate and inadequate

Has a bias that prohibits competent analysis of counter-arguments or objections

Explores an issue’s context and complexity superficially

Uses fallacies where the evidence may be inappropriate and/or biased, and the conclusion does not obviously follow

Creates counter-arguments and objections that are “straw persons”

Shows a bias on the part of the author, acknowledged or otherwise, that is blatant

Provides some background and context for the issue, but may not explain and/or explore it fully

Demonstrates a fallacy or two, the evidence may be inadequate, and the argument may be confused / confusing

Raises counter-arguments and objections but may dismiss them too easily or not explore them deeply

Shows some bias on the part of the author that may be apparent and problematic

Examines the complexity of the subject, addressing the context and significance of the issue

Has a sound reasoning that is based on a variety of evidential sources, and the reader can easily follow the argument

Considers counter-arguments and objections, and synthesizes different points of view

Acknowledges and addresses any biases on the part of the author

Makes clear the context and significance of the issue

Uses sound reasoning that is based on relevant, credible evidence, some of which may be used creatively to illuminate the subject even further

Has transitions that are artful and logical

Explores possible counter-arguments, objections, and any additional considerations sufficiently and thoroughly;

Avoids bias and considers all pertinent facts fully