| Level |
Criterion/Requirement |
| |
Research and
Documentation
(40%) |
|
4
|
Numerous relevant
scholarly sources (and primary sources, where available and
appropriate) demonstrating extensive, in-depth research; little
reliance on tertiary sources; sources skillfully incorporated into
paper at all necessary points; all citations--in-text and
bibliography--follow a standard bibliographic format
|
|
3
|
Several relevant
secondary sources, revealing adequate research; sources appropriately
referenced in paper; no more than one or two citation errors
|
|
2
|
Several relevant
secondary sources, more than one tertiary source; some facts not
referenced; several citation errors
|
|
1
|
Over-reliance on
tertiary sources; spotty documentation of facts in text; pattern of citation errors
|
|
|
ANY EVIDENCE OF ANY SOURCE OR
QUOTATION NOT CITED--0 FOR ENTIRE PAPER
|
| |
Analysis and
Argument (40%) |
|
4
|
Narrow, focused topic
with clear, insightful, informed thesis; forceful, persuasive argument
amply supported by facts that are carefully chosen and weighed;
evidence of sophisticated understanding of historical context and
causality
|
|
3
|
Topic good but a bit too
large for paper length; clear thesis; good argument well supported by
cited facts; sensitivity to historical context and causality
|
|
2
|
Topic considerably too
large for paper length and/or marginally related to course; thesis not
clear; paper organized more toward chronology than analysis and
argument
|
|
1
|
Topic considerably too
large for paper length and/or marginally related to course; simple
chronology with no discernible argument; logical and factual errors;
significant problems with understanding of historical context
|
| |
Grammar/Style
(15%) |
|
4
|
Essentially free of
grammatical errors; concise introduction with clear thesis; extremely
well organized and supported argument; cogent, summative conclusion
|
|
3
|
A few grammatical
errors; distinct introduction, though thesis not entirely clear;
organization and examples appropriate; conclusion does not summarize
the point
|
|
2
|
Several grammatical
errors; introduction and organization weak; conclusion weak
|
|
1
|
Pattern of ungrammatical
writing; little evidence of coherent organization
|
| |
Format/
Submission (5%) |
|
4
|
Paper neatly typed and
formatted according to assignment guidelines; electronic file clearly named
according to Electronic Submission guidelines; Digital Drop Box used
if available;
student name, E-mail address, Course and Section, Assignment, and Date
clearly indicated; if working with a team, team cited.
|
|
3
|
Paper typed and formatted
according to assignment guidelines with very few errors; electronic file clearly named
according to Electronic Submission guidelines; Digital Drop Box used
if available; no more than one of the above elements missing
|
|
2
|
Paper typed and formatted with
some errors; filename vague,
misleading, or incomplete; student uses floppy or e-mail attachment;
one or two of the above elements missing
|
|
1
|
Paper not typed, or typed with
numerous errors; format guidelines not followed; no electronic version
submitted; more than two of the above elements missing
|
John
I. Brooks III