Skip to content

Composition Forum 27, Spring 2013
http://compositionforum.com/issue/27/

Appendix 4 to Local History, Local Complexities: Revised Rubric for UL Lafayette First-Year Writing Program

Clancy Ratliff

This is an appendix to Local History, Local Complexities: The First-Year Writing Curriculum at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette.

Poor

Satisfactory

Outstanding

Content

  • Topic is too broad and general for a paper of its length
  • No clear main idea or sustained position in the paper (or argument is incredible to an academic audience)
  • Argument, if present, is unsupported,or evidence is insufficient
  • Paper is overly reliant on cliches orculturally conditioned/ ethnocentricassumptions and bias
  • Sources, if used, are used inappropriately (data dump, awkwardintegration, unintentional plagiarism,etc.)
  • Topic is manageable for a paper of its length
  • Position/argument is comprehensible even if not clearly stated
  • Amount of evidence is sufficient
  • Demonstrates critical thinking (ability to recognizecomplexity, biases, andstereotypical representations; distinguishing fact from opinion)
  • Use of sources is appropriate; no serious problems with integration of other materials
  • Topic is narrow enough to allow for a rigorous, nuanced treatment of the subject
  • Thesis is stated clearly
  • Evidence is ample to support positiontaken
  • Contains some acknowledgment of opposing/divergent views
  • Sources are used purposefully and strategically, integrated seamlessly

Organization

  • Introduction does not orient the reader to the concerns of the paper or contextualize the subject of the paper
  • Arrangement of the paper is haphazard and random
  • Paragraphs do not have transitions that guide the reader from one idea tothe next
  • Conclusion is absent or abrupt
  • Introduction isrecognizable even if it is not always reader-based
  • Paragraphs generally treat one idea at a time
  • Attempts at transitions betweenparagraphs are made, even if they are awkward
  • Conclusion provides some closure to the argument, even ifonly a summaryof the main points
  • Paper contains aclear, reader-based introduction, development, conclusion
  • Logical, smooth transitions between sections
  • Plan of development stated (forecasting statement, self-announcing structure toargument)
  • Conclusion does more than just summarize thepaper; restates the thesis in a fresh way or includes a gesture (call for action,unresolved questions, etc.)

Language Issues

  • Frequency of error (of any type) seriously detracts from the content of the paper
  • Grammar, punctuation, and spelling are mostly correct
  • Student shows command of language (word choice/ vocabulary)
  • Varied sentence structure
  • Paper is virtually free of error
  • Writer shows an unusual felicity with regard to word choice, turns of phrase (ex. uses obscure words, bon mots)
  • Sentence structure is complex but not cumbersome

Return to Composition Forum 27 table of contents.