| Criteria | 0 Points | 1 Point | 2 Points | 3 Points | 4 Points | 1 Point (Sophistication) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thesis | There is no defensible thesis. The intended thesis only restates the prompt. The intended thesis provides a summary of the issue with no apparent or coherent claim. There is a thesis, but it does not respond to the prompt. | N/A | ||||
| Evidence and Commentary | Simply restates the thesis (if present), repeats provided information irrelevant to the prompt. | Evidence: Provides evidence that is mostly general. Commentary: Summarizes the evidence but does not explain how the evidence supports the student’s argument. |
Evidence: Provides some specific, relevant evidence. Commentary: Explains how some of the evidence relates to the student’s argument, but no line of reasoning is established, or the line of reasoning is faulty. |
Evidence: Provides specific evidence to support all claims in a line of reasoning. Commentary: Explains how some of the evidence supports a line of reasoning and explains how at least one rhetorical choice in the passage contributes to the writer’s argument, purpose, or message. |
Evidence: Provides specific evidence to support all claims in line of reasoning. Commentary: Consistently explains how evidence supports a line of reasoning. Explains how multiple rhetorical choices in the passage contribute to the writer’s argument, purpose, or message. |
Demonstrates sophistication of thought and/or a complex understanding of the rhetorical situation by: 1. Explaining the significance or relevance of the writer’s rhetorical choices (given the rhetorical situation). 2. Explaining a purpose or function of the passage’s complexities or tensions. 3. Employing a style that is consistently vivid and persuasive. This point should be awarded only if the sophistication of thought or complete understanding is part of the student’s argument, not merely a phrase reference. |