iRubric: SMCP Final paper S21_15 rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
SMCP Final paper S21_15 SMCP Final paper S21 Rubric Code: J226B45 By amische Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Social Sciences Type: Writing Grade Levels: Undergraduate

ESSAY FORMAT Descriptions
	Excellent 1 pts	Good 0.75 pts	Fair 0.5 pts	Poor 0 pts
Introduction	Excellent A strong introduction has these elements: 1. An engaging lead-in to your case 2. A clear and compelling thesis statement 3. A preview of the structure of the paper	Good The introduction covers most of the required elements, but it is not well developed and/or missing one of those elements	Fair Intro is sketchy and confusing and/or missing two or more of these elements	Poor No introduction
Body	Excellent Body consists of well constructed paragraphs with topic sentences, supporting examples, and logical sequences between ideas. The ideas develop in a clear and progressive manner from paragraph to paragraph.	Good Paragraphs are reasonably coherent and organized, but the flow from point to point (within or between paragraphs) is is not always clear.	Fair Paragraph construction is unfocused, missing topic sentences, too long/short, awkward transitions, etc.	Poor Paragraph formatting is disorganized and confusing, making the essay hard to follow.
Conclusion	Excellent Conclusion contains: 1. A restatement of the main argument 2. Questions for further inquiry 3. An interesting leadout	Good The conclusion covers most of the required elements, but it is not well developed and/or missing one of those elements	Fair Missing two or more of these elements.	Poor No conclusion
DEFINITION AND BACKGROUND
	Excellent 1 pts	Good 0.75 pts	Fair 0.5 pts	Poor 0 pts
Definition of contentious politics	Excellent Clear and detailed explanation of the concept using associated terminology from the readings and class notes, including all important subconcepts, and clear application to the case.	Good 1. Less fully fleshed out definition that incorporates some associated terminology but leaves out important elements and/or subconcepts AND/OR 2. Application to the case is somewhat but sketchy and vague;	Fair Quite vague and sketchy definition that may be confusing or misleading on some points; AND/OR weak application to the case	Poor Little or no explanation of concept, inadequate application to csae, and/or or explanation that is substantially wrong in its understanding or presentation of the ideas.
Background and timeline	Excellent Lively, clear and engaging background presentation of the case that covers the basics: WHO, WHEN, WHERE, WHAT. Timeline effectively lays out the main events, focusing on protest events plus political context.	Good Basic background on the case is presented, but it is sketchy or undeveloped	Fair The case is not well presented, or presented in a confusing and partial way.	Poor No background on the case is presented.
CLAIMS
	Excellent 1 pts	Good 0.75 pts	Fair 0.5 pts	Poor 0 pts
Actor constitution	Excellent Clear and detailed explanation of the concept using associated terminology from the readings and class notes, including all important subconcepts. Excellent application to the case.	Good Less fully fleshed out definition that incorporates some associated terminology but leaves out important elements and/or subconcepts; OR discussion of case could be more developed.	Fair Quite vague and sketchy definition or case discussion that may be confusing or misleading on some points.	Poor Little or no explanation of concept, or explanation that is substantially wrong in its understanding or presentation of the ideas.
Collective action frames	Excellent Clear and detailed explanation of the concept using associated terminology from the readings and class notes, including all important subconcepts. Excellent application to the case.	Good Less fully fleshed out definition that incorporates some associated terminology but leaves out important elements and/or subconcepts; OR discussion of case could be more developed.	Fair Quite vague and sketchy definition or case discussion that may be confusing or misleading on some points.	Poor Little or no explanation of concept, or explanation that is substantially wrong in its understanding or presentation of the ideas.
PERFORMANCES
	Excellent 1 pts	Good 0.75 pts	Fair 0.5 pts	Poor 0 pts
Contained, confrontational, violent	Excellent Clear and detailed explanation of the concepts using associated terminology from the readings and class notes, including all important subconcepts. Excellent application to the case.	Good Less fully fleshed out definition that incorporates some associated terminology but leaves out important elements and/or subconcepts; OR discussion of case could be more developed.	Fair Quite vague and sketchy definition or case discussion that may be confusing or misleading on some points.	Poor Little or no explanation of concept, or explanation that is substantially wrong in its understanding or presentation of the ideas.
Additional concept 1	Excellent Clear and detailed explanation of the concept using associated terminology from the readings and class notes, including all important subconcepts. Excellent application to the case.	Good Less fully fleshed out definition that incorporates some associated terminology but leaves out important elements and/or subconcepts; OR discussion of case could be more developed.	Fair Quite vague and sketchy definition or case discussion that may be confusing or misleading on some points.	Poor Little or no explanation of concept, or explanation that is substantially wrong in its understanding or presentation of the ideas.
Additional concept 2	Excellent Clear and detailed explanation of the concept using associated terminology from the readings and class notes, including all important subconcepts.	Good Less fully fleshed out definition that incorporates some associated terminology but leaves out important elements and/or subconcepts; OR discussion of case could be more developed.	Fair Quite vague and sketchy definition that may be confusing or misleading on some points.	Poor Little or no explanation of concept, or explanation that is substantially wrong in its understanding or presentation of the ideas.
DYNAMICS
	Excellent 1 pts	Good 0.75 pts	Fair 0.5 pts	Poor 0 pts
Process diagram and dynamic analysis	Excellent Clear and detailed explanation of the framework using associated terminology from the readings and class notes, including all important subconcepts. Excellent application to the case.	Good Less fully fleshed out definition that incorporates some associated terminology but leaves out important elements and/or subconcepts; OR discussion of case could be more developed.	Fair Quite vague and sketchy definition or case discussion that may be confusing or misleading on some points.	Poor Little or no explanation of concept, or explanation that is substantially wrong in its understanding or presentation of the ideas.
SYNTHESIS
	Excellent 1 pts	Good 0.75 pts	Fair 0.5 pts	Poor 0 pts
Integration and argument	Excellent The synthesis pulls together concepts from ALL of the previous sections of the course, integrating them clearly and effectively. and weaving the into a persuasive argument that connects back to the thesis statement in the introduction.	Good The synthesis pulls together some of the previous elements but not all of them, AND/OR the connections between the concepts are not always clearly spelled out or linked to the overarching argument.	Fair The synthesis leaves out key concepts from the previous discussion AND/OR the connections between concepts and argument are confusing or poorly explained.	Poor There is little or no attempt to integrate concepts from earlier in the paper.
WRITING AND REFERENCES
	Excellent 1 pts	Good 0.75 pts	Fair 0.5 pts	Poor 0 pts
Grammatical clarity and fluency	Excellent Sentences are consistently grammatical, and the writing is clear, graceful and fluid. A pleasure to read!	Good Mostly good, with occasional awkward spots, rough writing, word choice issues, or grammatical errors. COULD USE BETTER PROOFREADING AND POLISHING	Fair Frequent grammatical errors, such as run-ons, fragment sentences, subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreement, verb tense, commas, punctuation, spelling. DISTRACTS FROM CONCENTRATING ON YOUR IDEAS.	Poor Serious and consistent problems in grammar, punctuation and/or spelling. DIFFICULT AND FRUSTRATING TO READ
Use of quotations and references	Excellent Quotations are relevant to context, well placed in sentences, and appropriately referenced. Reference list is complete and contains all sources used and/or referred to in the text	Good Quotes are awkwardly placed AND/OR: Sources are inconsistently cited and referenced, or citations are incomplete.	Fair Some quotes are missing or poorly placed; references are extremely sketchy or incomplete.	Poor Quotes are absent or consistently misused; citations or reference list are missing.

Subjects:

Social Sciences

Types:

Writing

Discuss this rubric