Grading Standards for Research Papers
Used by Professor Luther Spoehr of the Education Department
A
- Thesis is well developed and clearly focused
- Supporting evidence is thorough and relevant
- Narrative and description kept to minimum needed for analysis
- Conflicting evidence is consistently acknowledged and accounted for
- Counter-arguments are consistently anticipated and refuted
- Conclusion emerges logically from main arguments
- Footnotes are used when needed; footnotes and bibliography use consistent and appropriate format
- Well organized and well written
B
- Thesis is well developed, but may not be as clearly focused as in top category
- Supporting evidence is less thorough and/or relevant than in top category, but is still substantial
- A little too much narrative or description
- Conflicting evidence is usually acknowledged and accounted for
- Counter-arguments are usually anticipated and refuted
- Conclusion is logical extension of the rest of the essay, but may be somewhat attenuated
- Footnotes are used when needed; footnotes and bibliography use consistent and appropriate format
- Well organized and clearly, if not elegantly, written
C
- Thesis is adequate, but may need further explication or definition
- Supporting evidence is adequate but somewhat sketchy, or its relevance is not always made clear
- Too much narrative or description, at expense of analysis
- Relatively little concern for conflicting evidence
- Relatively little concern for counter-arguments, or they are not dealt with successfully
- Conclusion "goes through the motions"
- Footnotes are not always used when needed; footnotes and bibliography may sometimes be in inappropriate format
- Adequate organization and style, but may contain enough structural flaws or mechanical errors to distract from the presentation
NC
- Thesis is unclear or even missing
- Supporting evidence is irrelevant or missing; essay relies on assertion rather than demonstration
- Narrative or description far outweigh analysis
- No real concern for conflicting evidence
- Does not reveal awareness of counter-arguments
- Conclusion "goes through the motions" or is missing
- Footnotes and bibliography are sloppy or missing
- Sloppy organization, mechanics, style