CONTENT |
strong |
accep |
weak |
not accep |
- How appropriate is the topic in terms of the assignment?
- How evident is the purpose for writing?
- To what extent is the evidence/information:
Relevant? Accurate? Necessary? Complete?
|
|
|
|
|
REASONING |
strong |
accept |
weak |
not accep |
- How significant are the claims/ideas/purpose?
- what is the quality of the evidence?
- How sufficient is the context provided?
- What what extent are assumptions recognized and made explicit?
- To what extent does the interpretation and analysis of evidence/information/visuals show:
Depth of thinking? Logical reasoning? Complex reasoning? Accurate conclusions? Informed recommendations?
|
|
|
|
|
ORGANIZATION |
strong |
accep |
weak |
not accep |
- How well does the overall organization capture the designated purpose?
- To what extent does the ordering of information/evidence lead the reader through the text? (e.g., signposts, transitions, headings, bullets)
- How well do the parts connect with each other and the governing ideas?
- How well integrated are the visual and verbal elements?
|
|
|
|
|
RHETORIC OF THE DISCIPLINE |
strong |
accep |
weak |
not accep |
- To what extent is there sufficient knowledge of the subject demsonstrated?
- To what extent does the use of specialized concepts demonstrate understanding?
- How appropriate to the discipline is the:
Genre? Format? Language? Tone?
- To what extent is there evidence of disciplinary ways of thinking and an appropriate sense of audience?
|
|
|
|
|
CONVENTIONS/PRESENTATION |
strong |
accep |
weak |
not accep |
- To what extent does the reveal evidence:
Crafting? Editing? Proofreading?
- How accurately and complete is the information cited?
- How appropriate is the documentation style?
- How effective is the format used, including visuals and diagrams?
|
|
|
|
|
OVERALL EVALUATION |
strong |
accep |
weak |
not accep |