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 |