Introduction

Exemplary

Good

Fair

Poor

The background information of the

topic is provided in a clear manner. The
argument is clearly stated. Thesis is
focused and concise.

Thesis statement is clear but

is not entirely focused and
detailed. Background
information is provided but
only a broad basis.

The thesis statement is too simple.

The introduction lacks clear
background information.

There is no clear objective within

the introduction and the thesis
statement is not evident. There is
no background information
present.

Research and
Supporting Facts
relevant to address
the task

The important findings from the

research are summarized effectively.
The information is thorough and
relevant. Presents a logical explanation
for the research findings.

Less thorough, but still has

relevant points and
examples.

There is little to no analysis. Few

details from the research are
included. The findings from the
research lack an overall
connection with the main ideas.

No research is incorporated into

the paper. Content does not relate
to the thesis statement or the other
main points. Does not adequately
explain findings.

Asks questions or
frame hypotheses
relevant to the task

Converts an ill-defined problem

situation into a question (or questions)
that can be addressed within the
discipline; does this with a high degree
of efficiency, accuracy, and
thoroughness

Converts an ill-defined
problem situation into a
question (or questions) that
can be addressed within the
discipline; does this with
mixed or moderate degrees
of efficiency, accuracy, and
thoroughness

Misses some of the major

discipline-linked question(s) that
could be derived from an illdefined problem situation; focuses
on some irrelevant aspects; misses
some major aspects of the
problem; and/or poses the wrong
question

Misses the major discipline-linked

question(s) that could be derived
from an ill-defined problem
situation; focuses on irrelevant
aspects; misses major aspects of
the problem; and/or poses the
wrong question

Creativity and
original work

The idea of the task and the challenge is The idea of the task and the
unique
challenge is not completely
original

The idea of the task and the

challenge is quite similar to other
projects

The idea of the task and the

challenge have been copied

Knowledge

The student shows an excellent

command of a wide range of
terminology and uses it appropriately.

Terminology is accurate and

appropriate. Relevant facts
and examples are used to
show understanding.

Terminology is mostly accurate

and appropriate. Examples are
mostly relevant and usually show
understanding

Terminology is inconsistent or
incorrect. Facts and examples are
either absent, irrelevant, or do
not show understanding

Concept and apply

to other subjects

Application of concepts is appropriate

and sophisticated. The student
demonstrates conceptual awareness and
understanding by explaining, in detail,
connections to the subject matter.
Concepts are also applied effectively to
other subjects

Application of concepts is
appropriate but superficial.
The student demonstrates
conceptual awareness and
understanding by describing
connections to the subject
matter. The student attempts

Application of concepts is not

always appropriate. The student
demonstrates conceptual
awareness and understanding by
describing basic connections to
the subject matter.

Application of concepts is
inappropriate. The student may
demonstrate some conceptual
awareness and understanding by
recognizing basic connections to
the subject matter.

to apply concepts to other

situations but is not always
successful.

Correctly describes the logic and/or

evidence used to convey an
argument; distinguishes between
facts and inferences; accurately
compares and contrasts positions;
effectively builds a cogent synthesis

Generally follows the

reasoning of the argument
but misses some elements
of the argument; correctly
describes some important
aspects of the evidence
and logic but not all;
builds a reasonable
synthesis but misses
important points

Generally follows the

reasoning of the argument but
is confussed ; correctly
describes some important
aspects of the evidence and
logic but confussed; builds a
reasonable synthesis but
conguses important points

Argument is misunderstood;
synthesis is ill-conceived or not
present

Critically evaluates and justifies

Analyzes:
Evaluates support conclusions by examining strengths
and weaknesses of an argument
for claims and
justifies
conclusions

Demonstrates some ability

to critically evaluate and
justify conclusions by
examining strengths and
weaknesses of an
argument; misses some
important strengths or
weaknesses

Demonstrates no ability to
critically evaluate and justify
conclusions by examining
strengths and weaknesses of an
argument; misses important
strengths or weaknesses

Does not take an evaluative

position or takes a position on
weak evidence; does not
defend position when called for
or conclusions are not
supported by evidence

Experiments in a good
level creating a novel or
unique idea, claim,
question, form or
performance

Experiments with less creating Reformulates a collection of

a novel or unique idea, claim,
available ideas
question, form or performance

Analyzes:
Deconstructs an
argument by
indicating claims
and/or evidence
and synthesizes
evidence from

Innovates:
Demonstrates
innovative and
creative thinking
with regard to an
idea, claim,
question, form or
performance

Creates a novel or unique idea,

claim, question, form or
performance using or recognizing
creative risk-taking