– Uses correct spelling and demonstrates strong vocabulary skills (0-1 error)
– Uses words professionally, with consideration for audience make-up
– Grammar, tense, parallelism, structure is excellent
Opening
Statement – Offers a weak or unfocused opening
statement
– Fails to identify topic or direction – Opens with brief or simplified statement of issues
– Provides some detail or hints at topic or direction – Hooks reader with clever or insightful opener to clearly identify case issues
– Clearly defines topic and direction
Organization &
Logical
Arguments – Use or lack of headings or breaks causes material to seem jumbled
– Shows weak logic flow or irrelevant data points
– Details are not linked or appear in unrelated order
– Research lacks purpose or diligence – Uses some headings or breaks, some may be irrelevant or misplaced
– Provides organized analysis that generally maintains focus
– Research indicates some planning; some details may be anecdotal – Uses headings/visual cues appropriately throughout to support readers navigation of document
– Provides clear organization to guide reader through logic of analysis
– Research shows planning based on audience needs
Conclusions, Recommen-dations and References; Length – Lacks proper evidence for any analysis presented
– Conclusions or recommendations are not based on information presented
– Includes only 1-2 sources
– More than -page over or under required length – Some evidence is presented to support analysis
– Some facts may be missing or irrelevant to the analysis
– Includes 3-5 sources
– Within -page of assigned length – Evidence addresses audience needs
– Clear and concise, with high regard for audiences ability to decode
– Minimum 6 sources, with at least 3 secondary
– Within -page of assigned length
Headings or other design elements used consistently, in appropriate places
– Visuals and visual design enhance readability
– Shows thought and preparation for audience needs
Overall Design, Writing Quality, Proofreading – Main points remain unclear, with little consideration for audience
– Lack of proofreading exhibited by sentence structure, spelling and use or lack of details (0-1 pt.) – Main points are stated, but may not be fully developed
– Inconsistent or sloppy proofreading results in some sentence or spelling mistakes (2-3 points) – Well thought-out topic, research and presentation, with high consideration for audience make-up
– Diligent proofreading results in readable, error-free document (4-5 pts.)
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|