DanielNester.com | Teaching

Student Reading and Writing Rubric
This rubric is adapted from English departments and First Year Writing Programs, and so the language in the fields below is in education-speak. I have been trying to provide a pop-up link with plain-spoken English as well as concrete example of the issue at hand.

	Content/Argument	Ideas	Organization	Diction and mechanics	Research and documentation	Reading and writing skills hierarchy
A/A-	Has a significant thesis, clearly defined and supported with substantial, relevant information. Includes relevant and specific details, examples, or images. Considers counterarguments, explains why the paper’s idea might be better.	Excels in responding to assignment. Writing is interesting, demonstrates sophistication of thought. Central idea/thesis is clearly communicated, worth developing; limited enough to be manageable. Paper recognizes some complexity of its thesis: may acknowledge its contradictions, qualifications, or limits and follow out their logical implications. Understands and critically evaluates its sources, appropriately limits and defines terms.	Writing is planned logically and progresses in clearly ordered and necessary steps. It is developed with originality and attention to proportion and emphasis. The paragraphs are logically and effectively developed. The transitions between paragraphs are effective.	The sentences are skillfully constructed, effective, and varied. Words used are vivid, accurate, and original. The writing is without serious flaws in grammar or mechanics. There is evidence of a personal style.	Sources used are relevant, substantial, and authoritative. Information is introduced and incorporated smoothly and appropriately. Documentation is clear, correct, and adequate.	The student writer is able to pose a problem to solve based on rhetorical reading or text and/or the facts and ideas under consideration; Come up with an original idea as a result of this reading/responding process.

B+/B	Thesis is apparent but perhaps too general or commonplace. It is supported with some proof, but it may be sketchy or occasionally irrelevant. The content may be thin, although some generalizations may be supported with examples. May consider opposing viewpoint (s), but often without making direct connection with overall idea.	A solid paper, responding appropriately to assignment. Clearly states a thesis/central idea, but may have minor lapses in development. Begins to acknowledge complexity of central idea and the possibility of other points of view. Shows careful reading of sources, but may not evaluate them critically. Attempts to define terms, not always successfully	The plan of development is apparent but not consistently followed. The writing lacks clarity or is repetitious. The paragraphs are generally effective, but transitions may be weak or mechanical.	The sentences are correctly constructed but lack distinction, creativity, or style. Words are generally used correctly, and the vocabulary is adequate. There may be some lapses in grammar, punctuation, or spelling.	Sources used are too general, lacking in authority, or occasionally irrelevant. Information is occasionally incorporated without introductory phrases or is weakly connected to the content of the essay. In-text citations and References or Works Cited page are generally correct, but may contain some minor errors.	The student writer is able to read and respond skeptically and show an understanding of the context of the text. Read rhetorically—considering the purpose of the text; analyze the wording, rhythm, use of repetition etc., be able to break down the argument or idea; Should be able to partially agree or partially disagree. In short, should be able to enter into a conversation with the author.

C+/C	The thesis is lacking or is only implied, confused, or not supported with appropriate details. The writing is thin, with few concrete, specific examples or illustrations to support the general points. Sometimes there will be a thesis or idea, but it will be repeated or merely rephrased to support itself.	Adequate but weaker and less effective, possibly responding less well to assignment. Presents central idea in general terms, often depending on platitudes or cliches. Usually does not acknowledge other views. Shows basic comprehension of sources, perhaps with lapses in understanding. If it defines terms, often depends on dictionary definitions.	The plan and purpose of the essay are not apparent. It is not developed or there is some irrelevancy or redundancy. The paragraphs are incoherent or undeveloped. Transitions are weak or lacking.	Sentences are often not grammatically correct. The vocabulary is elementary, not college level. Words are used incorrectly. There are persistent usage, spelling, or punctuation problems. Often, the writer will repeat points in thesis, body, and conclusion.	Sources are lacking or inappropriate; Information from sources is not adequately incorporated into the body of the essay (e.g., “drop quotes”). Writer is too dependent on sources without adequate discussion or synthesis with idea under consideration. Documentation is missing, inadequate, or contains major errors.	Student writer should be able to summarize a text accurately, as well as find the main idea in a text and understand how the idea has been developed and supported.

C-/D		Does not have a clear central idea or does not respond appropriately to the assignment. Thesis may be too vague or obvious to be developed effectively. Paper may misunderstand sources. Does not respond to the assignment, lacks a thesis or central idea, and may neglect to use sources where necessary				Not yet able read a text and offer a summary in a sentence; not yet able to paraphrase a passage of a text.

Last updated November 2006

"Reading and writing skills hierarchy" column adapted from: Mookerjee, Robin. "Writing the Essay I." E-mail to Daniel Nester. 14 July 2003.