CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING PAPERS

Outstanding papers (A)

1. Assignment/Audience:  Not only fulfill the assignment but do so in a fresh and mature way.  They’re exciting to read;  they accommodate themselves well to the intended audience.  Analyze and reflect rather than merely describe.

2. Thesis/Purpose: Provide details, specifics, scenes, evidence.  They illustrate generalizations, develop and explore the implications of their own ideas, and are reasonably sophisticated. 

3. Organization: Are tightly unified and develop a thesis and/or sustain a line of thought clearly and logically, without unnecessary digressions.  Paragraphs are fully developed, with clear topic sentences, and follow naturally from what precedes them; the conclusion reinforces the reader’s confidence in the writer’s control of the paper.

4. Style: Are written in a style that is appropriate to the topic and audience and is rhetorically effective. The prose is clear, apt, and occasionally memorable.  Contain few errors by contemporary American Standard English criteria. 

5. Process/Citation: Use MLA notation and Works Cited correctly.  Demonstrate an understanding of the writing process: invention, drafting, peer review, revision (which may involve reconsidering primary text and or draft).

Good papers (B)

1. Assignment/Audience: Also fulfill the terms of the assignment, but in a way that is more predictable.  Nevertheless, it represents a sophisticated understanding of the problem and addresses its intended audience appropriately.  With slight revision, could probably be an A paper.

2. Thesis/Purpose : Say something, but without the precision and specificity of the best papers; are more general, more dependent on vague, subjective, or undefined terms; do not fully develop arguments--are less sophisticated as a result.  Do not analyze or reflect thoroughly; depend solely on description or narration.  Show an awareness of other points of view.

3. Organization: Are adequately organized, but not as unified or successful in developing and sustaining a consistent argument or line of thinking.  May contain irrelevant material.  The introduction and conclusion are clear, but perhaps not as effective as they could be. 

4. Style: Are well to adequately written, but not as clear, concise or syntactically smooth and effective as the best papers; may make use of clichéd or trite language.  Punctuation, grammar and spelling reveal proficient use of the conventions of edited American English.  It would be surprising to find sentence errors--comma splices, fragments, fused sentences--in a B paper.

5. Process/Citation:.  Use MLA notation and Works Cited correctly. Adequate writing process: multiple drafts and revisions.

Acceptable papers (C)

1. Assignment/Audience: May not adequately or appropriately fulfill the terms of the assignment.   An adequate sense of audience and purpose.

2. Thesis/Purpose : Say very little:  are general and vague, do not develop ideas, provide few specifics.  The evidence is there but is obvious.  Lack analysis or reflection of the topic.  The reasoning is predictable and/or flawed.  There is little awareness of other points of view.

3. Organization: Are poorly organized:  lack effective unity and focus; do not successfully illustrate a line of thinking or sustain an argument; are weakened by gaps in logic and/or irrelevant material. In short, the organizational structure is recognizable but disjointed. 

4. Style: Are not well written:  are unclear and/or awkward; are weakened by an inappropriate level of diction or by mechanical problems.  Sentence structure is generally correct, although the writer may show a limited competence with sentence effectiveness, failing to use subordination, sentence variety, modifiers.  However, gross mechanical errors such as comma splices, unintentional fragments, fused sentences, subject/verb and noun/pronoun agreement—errors that reveal an inadequate understanding of sentence structure—are not present (those are more common to failing papers).

5. Process/Citation: Use MLA notation adequately. May be characterized by poor drafts or unwillingness to engage in substantive revision.

FOR EDITING AND CORRECTING DRAFTS

Use a  üto indicated places or passages where the idea or concept seems “right,” and a É  where the idea or concept seems to be misunderstood or “wrong," or where something needs to be added.

Use a straight line under phrases or passages that are clear and effective, and a wavy line below phrases and passages that are unclear.  Circle words or passages where the language, style, discourse or approach seems inappropriate. Brackets around sentences [ ] draw attention to the sentence--see marginalia.

Micro:

delete	use active voice
close up	As with the auk, a thick-bodied, short- necked bird without grace.  Restyle
insert space	wrong word
let it stand	word choice
new paragraph	comma splice
transpose	Parallelism
spelling	reduce or insert caps
insert	one of us or the both of us is confused