(N/A)
How evident is the primary point of the paper? Does the paper uniformly sustain that focus, or does it wander at times?
How evident is the meaning of your words, sentences, and paragraphs? Do you define your terms, make adequate distinctions, and use concepts consistently? To what extent do grammatical errors or stylistic infelicities interfere with the comprehension of your writing?
How accurately do you depict the views of the authors whom you cite—most especially, your chosen historical figure? How thoroughly do you support your interpretation with textual evidence? How artfully do you integrate an author’s claims from a variety of textual locations?
How important is the aspect of a figure’s thought that you have chosen to address? Have you identified a tension that is central or merely ancillary to the person’s moral theology?
How searching is your examination of the coherence of the figure’s moral theology? Do you oversimplify the task of evaluation by ignoring possible distinctions and qualifications? Do you entertain at least one substantive challenge to your concluding judgment? Do you provide a compelling response to that challenge?
How crisp, orderly, and flowing is your writing? Is the meaning of your prose discernable on a first pass, or does it require deliberate rereading?
How thoroughly do you observe the "expectations" delineated in the assignment instructions?