Grading Rubric—Jihwan Jo

Course: ENGL 102

Assignment: Polemic Analysis . 39/50 Grade

Superior (50–45 = A) / Strong (44–40 = B) / Competent (39–35 = C) / Weak (34–30 = D) / Unacceptable
Content / Development / oAnalyzes the original polemic with exceptional depth and thoroughness
oInsightful, original
oComplexity of thought in developing new purpose(s), audience(s), and well-targeted rhetorical strategies
oEffective use of specific detail to support analysis
oExcellent organization
oExceeds requirements for the assignment / oAnalyzes the original polemic with depth and thoroughness
oEstablishes interesting new purpose(s), audience(s), and a range of targeted rhetorical strategies
oGood examples, specific support
oAssertive thoughts/ thesis
oEffective organization
oMay exceed some requirements for the assignment / oUnified idea, but maybe obvious in analysis of original polemic
oEstablishes purpose and identifies some strategies to achieve it, specifies some audience appeals
oGives some supporting details
oShows clarity of thought, but lacking in complexity
oSome lapses in organization
oMeets requirements
/ oWeak or surface-level analysis of original polemic
oUnclear in describing new purpose, audience, or rhetorical strategies
oRambling ideas, lacking support
oOverly general, vague
oLack of organization
detracts from paper
oLacking requirements (because this is a list rather than an essay) / oFails to provide analysis
oLittle/no new rhetorical strategies
oLack of details and/or support
oSummary
oNo apparent organization
oFails to address requirements of assignment
Expression / Mechanics / oSentence are varied and forceful
oSuperior word choice
oStyle is fresh, precise, and idiomatic
oTone complements the subject, distinguishes the write, and defines the audience
oRare mechanical errors / oSentences are largely correct and varied
oStrong word choice
oStyle is clear and idiomatic
oTone fits the subject, persona, and audience
oMay have a few usage, spelling, or punctuation errors / oSentences are correct but ordinary
oWord choice is correct, but obvious
oStyle is generally correct and idiomatic
oTone is acceptable for the subject
oSome mechanical errors / oSentences are immature or tediously patterned
oWord choice is vague or not idiomatic
oStyle is vague
oTone is inconsistent
oConsistent Mechanical errors / oSentences are incoherent
oNon-standard word choice
oNon-standard style
oTone is indiscernible
oincorrect and distracting mechanical errors

Additional Comments:

·  Wow, you are WAY harder on yourself than I would have been. I actually think your polemic was pretty good—and I think the humor AND the frustration with this issue came across rather nicely.

·  Your analysis is more of a bullet list than an analysis, but it is an excellent start. As far as a rhetorical analysis goes, you touch on it: you discuss audience, support, organization—but you don’t talk about rhetorical techniques you used: repetition, humor, rhetorical questions. You do, however, talk about your use of ethos and pathos, which is great.

·  Would it help you to see a few analyses that worked really well? Does having a model help you? I would like to see you revise this list into an actual essay. Maybe when we sit down before Thanksgiving we could go over it step by step—or during office hours before then.

·  Personally, I am completely impressed with how well you write. I took five years of Spanish and while I can understand some, I sure can’t write it. I think you’re doing a great job. And you should be particularly proud that your humor came across in the piece. The hardest (and most impressive) think to do in another language is be funny. Well done!