Skip to main content
iRubric: SMCP s18 Memo 2 rubric

iRubric: SMCP s18 Memo 2 rubric


edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
SMCP s18 Memo 2 
SMCP s18 Memo 1
Rubric Code: CXA46A2
By amische
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Social Sciences  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Contentious performances
  Excellent

2 pts

Good

1.5 pts

Fair

1 pts

Poor

0.5 pts

Q1: Contained, violent, disruptive?

Excellent

Shows a strong understanding of the difference between contained, disruptive and violent performances, using associated terminology;

AND: Shows vividly how your movement performs and moves between these types of performances
Good

Explains the difference between types of performances, but the discussion is sketchy and without sufficient use of associated terminology;

AND/OR: Shows how the movement performs these repertoires, but in a vague and undeveloped way.
Fair

Discussion of the difference between the three types of performances is vague and/or confusing, AND/OR inadequately applied to the case.
Poor

Missing key elements in explaining the difference between the three types of performances, AND/OR missing an application to the case.
Q2: Principle or strategy?

Excellent

Clearly discusses the differences between nonviolence as a principle or a strategy, providing vivid examples from your movement and showing deep and nuanced understanding of this distinction.
Good

Discusses the difference between principled and strategic nonviolence, but the discussion and/or the examples seem vague and undeveloped.
Fair

Discussion of the difference between principled and strategic nonviolence is confusing and underdeveloped, and/or is thinly applied to the case.
Poor

Discussion of this distinction is weak or misleading, and/or insufficiently applied to the case.
Q3: Nonviolent civil resistance
  Excellent

1 pts

Good

0.75 pts

Fair

0.5 pts

Poor

0.25 pts

Concept 1

Excellent

Clearly and accurately defines the term, using associated terminology from readings and class notes in the discussion of the case.
Good

Definition is adequate but sketchy and without sufficient use of associated terminology.
Fair

Definition is unclear or somewhat confusing; may be missing some elements.
Poor

Definitions is misleading, confusing or wrong, or is missing core elements.
Concept 2

Excellent

Clearly and accurately defines the term, using associated terminology from readings and class notes in the discussion of the case.
Good

Definition is adequate but sketchy and without sufficient use of associated terminology.
Fair

Definition is unclear or somewhat confusing; may be missing some elements.
Poor

Definitions is misleading, confusing or wrong, or is missing core elements.
Concept 3

Excellent

Clearly and accurately defines the term, using associated terminology from readings and class notes in the discussion of the case.
Good

Definition is adequate but sketchy and without sufficient use of associated terminology.
Fair

Definition is unclear or somewhat confusing; may be missing some elements.
Poor

Definitions is misleading, confusing or wrong, or is missing core elements.
Application to the case

Excellent

Clear and compelling application of all three concepts to the case; shows a deep and nuanced practical understanding of the core arguments of theories of non-violent civil resistance (NVCR).
Good

Application to the case is a bit sketchy; shows a surface-level understanding of the theory of NVCR.
Fair

Application to the case is quite sketchy and undeveloped; shows a vague or somewhat misleading understanding of NVCR
Poor

Application to the case is weak and or quite misleading on some points.
Writing clarity and grammar
  Excellent

2 pts

Good

1.5 pts

Fair

1 pts

Poor

0.5 pts

Writes clearly and grammatically

Excellent

Sentences are consistently grammatical, with hardly any errors throughout. Sentences are clear, graceful and fluid. A pleasure to read.
Good

Occasional awkward spots, rough writing, confusing word choice or minor grammatical errors. Distracts from reader focus on ideas.
Fair

Frequent grammatical errors, such as such as run-ons, fragment sentences, subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreement, verb tense, commas, punctuation, spelling. Hard to concentrate on ideas.

I SUGGEST YOU TAKE YOUR NEXT PAPER TO THE WRITING CENTER BEFORE SUBMISSION.
Poor

Serious and consistent problems in grammar, punctuation and/or spelling. Writing is rough and choppy. Difficult and frustrating to read.

NEXT PAPER MUST BE TAKEN TO THE WRITING CENTER BEFORE SUBMISSION.





Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


iRubric and RCampus are Trademarks of Reazon Systems, Inc.
Copyright (C) Reazon Systems Inc. All Rights Reserved

n178