The writing is clearly focused which leads to achieving a well-defined goal. The purpose is clearly defined. The writing supports the purpose with concise, logical details that meet the reader’s informational needs. Sources, if used, are acknowledged.

21 – 30 pts

The writing addresses an identifiable goal by offering the reader general basic information. The development is limited, sketchy, and/or general. The purpose can be identified. The writing sometimes supports the purpose with concise, logical details that meet the reader’s informational needs. Sources, if used, are sometimes acknowledged.

11 – 20 pts

The writing needs a clarified goal as the text has no clear sense of purpose. The purpose needs to be better identified. The student does not support the purpose with concise, logical details that meet the answer/response requirements. Sources, if used, were not properly acknowledged.

0 – 10 pts

30

The text flows easily with a variety of sentence structures and lengths. Compact sentences or phrases make the point clear. The text reflects logic and sense and helps show how ideas relate.

21 – 30 pts

The text flows efficiently but lacks variety in sentence structure. Sometimes compact sentences or phrases make the point clear but some sentences are wordy. The text reflects logic and sense and helps show how some ideas relate. Fragments, if used, distract from the flow of the text.

11 – 20 pts

The text uses sentences that tend to be choppy, incomplete, rambling, or awkward. The text is difficult to follow. Wordy sentences detract from the purpose. The text tends to obscure meaning, rather than showing the reader how ideas relate.

0 – 10 pts

30

The writer demonstrates control of standard writing conventions and uses them effectively to enhance readability. Errors tend to be so few and minor the reader can easily skim right over them. Paragraph division is sound and reinforces the organizational structure. Grammar and usage are correct and contribute to clarity and style. Punctuation is smooth and guides the reader through the text. Spelling is generally correct even on more difficult words. Only light editing would be required to polish the text for publication. Graphic devices, when used, are clear, helpful, visually appealing and supportive of the text.

21 – 30 pts

Errors in spelling, punctuation, usage and grammar, capitalization, and/or paragraphing repeatedly distract the reader and make the text difficult to read. The reader must read once to decode, then again for meaning. Paragraph divisions are missing, irregular, or so frequent (e.g. every sentence) that it does not relate to the organization of the text. Errors in grammar and usage are very noticeable and may affect meaning. Punctuation is often missing or incorrect. Spelling errors are frequent even on common words. Extensive editing would be required to polish the text for publication. Graphic devices, when used, are not clear, helpful, visually appealing or supportive of the text.

11 – 20 pts

The writer shows reasonable control over a limited range of standard writing conventions. Errors are numerous or serious enough to be somewhat distracting, but the writer handles some conventions well. Paragraph divisions are attempted but paragraphs sometimes run together or begin in the wrong places. Problems with grammar and usage are not serious enough to distort meaning. Terminal (end-of-sentence) punctuation is almost always correct; internal punctuation (commas, apostrophes, semicolons) may be incorrect or missing. Spelling is usually correct on common words. Moderate editing would be required to polish the text for publication. Graphic devices, when used, are sometimes clear, helpful, visually appealing and supportive of the text.

0 – 10 pts

30

Clear, concise description of what was found and how it was found. Results are presented in an easy to understand way with only the necessary pieces of information presented. Results are interpreted and linked back to the problem at hand. Tables and figures are easy to understand.

21 – 30 pts

Very little description of what was found or far too much extraneous information presented. Summary tables and/or results are difficult to read and/or understand. Presentation of results is incomplete and there is no organization. No interpretation of the results relative to the problem is given.

11 – 20 pts

Description of the analysis is mostly clear but it too brief or too long. Presentation of results is choppy making it hard to follow. Little interpretation of results is done. Tables and figures can be understood.

0 – 10 pts

The main ideas were presented in and concise, orderly, and clear manner The presentation filled the time allotted The slides were appropriate and supported the presentation The presenter stayed on topic and maintained the audience interest The presenter was responsive to audience questions.

17 – 24 pts

The main ideas were unclear The presentation exceed the time allotted, or filled less than 75% The slides were incongruous with the presentation The presenter did not stayed on topic or maintain the audience interest The presenter was not responsive to audience questions.

10 – 16 pts

The main ideas presented in and generally orderly manner The presentation fill more the 75% of the time allotted Most of the slides were appropriate and supported the presentation The presenter generally stayed on topic and maintained the audience interest The presenter was responsive to audience questions.

0 – 9 pts

TOTAL

144