return to FYV home page

Writing Expectations

Finding Your Voice: Advocacy and Change

The following are guidelines for your autobiography, response papers to assigned texts and speech. For each element below, e.g. title, thesis or central question, etc., three examples are given: excellent, fair and weak. This should give you an idea of what level of writing skill you have/are aiming for, as well as that of your peer editor’s.

Content

 

Excellent

Fair

Weak

Title of paper

Original title reflecting main idea of paper; invites reader interest/curiosity

Somewhat general matching with paper’s theme

Same title as book

Thesis or central question

Clear statement of an intriguing thesis or central question

General or vague thesis or question, including student’s opinion

None

Identification of support of thesis or central question

Specific examples of support, including page number from text

Broad generalizations and stereotyping

None or mis-identification

Challenge to thesis or central question

Discussion of opposing views

Broad generalizations and stereotyping; no specific references to text

None

Overall faculty reaction to paper

Is so good it makes me forget that I evaluate student papers for a living

Give me some pleasure, but I know I’m working

Agony

 

Mechanics

 

Excellent

Fair

Weak

Thesis or question

Specific, well-crafted statement; needs to be supported by evidence – validity not immediately obvious

Broad, general, descriptive statement; validity of statement generally recognized without supporting evidence

None or doesn’t relate to rest of paper

Intro-ductory paragraph

Connection to and/or amplification of thesis or question; creative techniques used

Some connection to thesis

No connection to rest of paper or "it’s all about me"

Organiza-tion of paper

Clearly organized; flows logically from one point to the next; creatively done

Basic elements present (thesis, support, conclusion); not particularly creatively done or well written (e.g. wordy, inconsistent order of elements, etc.)

Not organized or poorly done, e.g. jumps from topic to topic, no support of thesis

Concluding paragraph

Restatement of thesis + conclusions drawn from evidence presented and implications of argument

Restatement of thesis

None or weak conclusion

Citations

Thorough references with complete and consistent information for each citation

Some. Inconsistent punctuation, information, etc.

None

Spelling

Few if any errors. Obviously spell-checked and proofread

Several errors. Sole reliance on spell-check and not proofread

Numerous errors. No obvious attempt at spell checking or proofreading

Grammar

Few if any errors. Obviously grammar-checked, proofread; thorough effort made to research answers to grammar problems

Several errors. Sole reliance on grammar-check and not proofread; some attempt to research answers to grammar problems

Numerous errors. No obvious attempt to research and correct errors