• offer insightful responses to the reading of published texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• offer insightful responses to classmates’ texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• incorporate the reading of student and professional texts into every stage of his/her writing processes
• make global, paragraph-and sentence- level revisions using a wide range of strategies (addition, deletion, substitution, transposition, transformation)
• frequently use teacher and peer response generatively, moving beyond a single, narrow comment to revise other aspects of the paper or to initiate revisions

• perform skillfully in a variety of rhetorical situations, suggesting s/he will be able to handle nearly any writing task with flair
• choose and address ambitious topics and/or use innovative approaches
• produce texts which are appropriate, occasionally even sophisticated, in the way they identify and address various audiences
• accomplish ambitious or innovative purposes in relation to his/her chosen topics and audiences

• writing that is consistently ambitious and mature, reflecting the freshness of the writer’s ideas, strategies, perspectives, or manners of expression
• writing that consistently shows the writer’s keen eye for detail through an effective texture of general and specific ideas
  and through the writer’s ability to
• consistently state ideas clearly and effectively, provide substantial support for ideas, and discuss ideas in a manner that reflects the complexity of issues
• not only describe phenomena or events clearly and effectively, but also analyze and interpret their possible meanings, consistently going beyond the obvious

Use of Resources*

*Sources must be used ethically & documented appropriately.

• adeptly use human, internet and library resources in virtually every stage of his/her writing processes
• draw consistently upon personal experience and observations of the world, sometimes critically, sometimes generatively, sometimes as support for or illustration of ideas
• seamlessly incorporate ideas and insights gained from reading into his/her own texts, sometimes critically, sometimes generatively, sometimes as support for or illustration of ideas
• allusions, interpretive strategies, and stylistic sophistication suggest wide reading, not only of course materials but also of a wide variety of print and electronic texts

• move the reader effortlessly though a complex presentation of ideas and issues; the text is organic, shaped by the demands of the ideas and issues
• consistently offer opening strategies that are creative and engaging and conclusions that provide more than simple restatements of preceding ideas
• include mature sentences of various types and lengths; apt word choices; effective use of metaphor and analogy; an appropriate tone; and a distinctive voice

• demonstrates the writer’s ability to insightfully analyze his/her writing, providing examples to support the analysis, and exploring how the texts were revised, especially noting the use of teacher and peer comments

• multiple drafts, evocative response questions, responses from classmates, insightful responses to classmates’ drafts, substantive revisions, adept editing, and insightful unit analyses
• individual papers that are long enough to successfully engage the tasks, generally 5-7 pages, though this may differ depending on the projects and based on discussion with the instructor
• consistent evidence of the writer’s ability to complete all assigned work promptly and adeptly
• Incomplete portfolios may not be graded A.

• although not necessarily perfect, are virtually free of the kinds of errors that compromise the rhetorical effectiveness of the pieces, and have virtually no stigmatized errors

• offer thoughtful responses to the reading of published texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• offer thoughtful responses to classmates’ texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• incorporate the reading of student and professional texts into almost every stage of his/her writing processes
• make global, paragraph-and sentence- level revisions using a variety of strategies (addition, deletion, substitution, transposition, etc.)
• use teacher and peer response generatively, moving beyond a single, narrow comment to revise other aspects of the paper or to initiate revisions

• perform skillfully in a variety of rhetorical situations, suggesting s/he will be able handle nearly any writing task with skill
• choose and address ambitious topics and/or use innovative approaches
• produce texts which are appropriate in the way they identify and address various audiences
• accomplish ambitious or innovative purposes in relation to his/her chosen topics and audiences

• writing that is often ambitious and mature, generally reflecting a certain freshness of ideas, strategies, perspectives, or manners of expression
• writing that generally shows the writer’s eye for detail through an effective texture of general and specific ideas
  and through the writer’s ability to
• consistently state ideas clearly and effectively, provide an effective amount of support for ideas, and discuss ideas in a manner that suggests the complexity of issues
• consistently describe phenomena or events clearly and effectively, and to analyze and interpret their possible meanings, often going beyond the obvious

Use of Resources*

*Sources must be used ethically & documented appropriately.

Writer’s ability to

• skillfully use human, internet and library resources in virtually every stage of his/her writing processes
• draw frequently upon personal experience and observations of the world, sometimes critically, sometimes generatively, sometimes as support for or illustration of ideas
• effectively incorporate ideas and insights from reading into his/her own texts, sometimes critically, sometimes generatively, sometimes as support for or illustration of ideas
• allusions, interpretive strategies, and stylistic sophistication suggest the reading of, not only course materials but also additional print and electronic texts

• move the reader easily though a fairly complex presentation of ideas and issues; the text is largely organic, shaped by the demands of the ideas and issues
• generally offer opening strategies that are creative and engaging and conclusions that provide more than simple restatements of preceding ideas
• include sentences of various types and lengths; effective word choices; occasional use of metaphor and analogy; a generally appropriate tone; and a generally distinctive voice

• demonstrates the writer’s ability to thoughtfully analyze his/her writing, providing examples to support the analysis, and exploring how the texts were revised, especially noting the use of teacher and peer comments

• multiple drafts, thoughtful questions for response, responses from classmates, thought-provoking responses to classmates’ drafts, substantive revisions, thorough editing, and thoughtful unit analyses
• individual papers that are long enough to successfully engage the tasks, generally 5-7 pages, though this may differ depending on the projects and based on discussion with the instructor
• consistent evidence of the writer’s ability to complete all assigned work promptly and skillfully
• Incomplete portfolios may not be graded B.

• although not necessarily perfect, are virtually free of the kinds of errors that compromise the rhetorical effectiveness of the pieces, and have virtually no stigmatized errors

• offer informed responses to the reading of published texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• offer substantive responses to classmates’ texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• incorporate the reading of student and professional texts into various stages of his/her writing processes
• make global or paragraph-level revisions using one or two predominant strategies; however, sentence- and word-level revisions predominate
• revise, generally in response to specific comments made by the teacher or peers; the writer is not clearly a self-starter when it comes to revision

• perform competently in a variety of rhetorical situations, suggesting s/he will be able to handle nearly any writing task successfully
• choose and address standard topics in appropriate ways
• produce texts which identify various audiences, but s/he may experience some difficulty bridging knowledge or opinion gaps between writer and reader
• accomplish reasonable purposes in relation to his/her chosen topics and audiences

• writing that is competent and sometimes compelling, reflecting the writer’s ability to draw upon familiar ideas, strategies, perspectives or manners of expression
• writing that incorporates detail in support of a general idea, often in a somewhat formulaic or predictable manner and through the writer’s ability to
• almost always state ideas clearly and effectively and provide support for ideas, although the complexities of issues may be suggested rather than fully treated
• describe phenomena or events clearly and effectively and to analyze and interpret their possible meanings, though interpretations may be obvious or perfunctory

Use of Resources*

*Sources must be used ethically & documented appropriately.

Writer’s ability to

• successfully use human, internet and library resources at various stages of his/her writing processes
• draw upon experience and observations of the world and connect these to readings or new situations. The connections may not be fully integrated or explored.
• use outside readings, though these ideas may not be well-integrated into papers, or may be used in a cut-and-paste fashion rather than a more organic one.
• there is evidence of the critical and analytical reading of assigned texts, both print and electronic, through the incorporation of ideas from the reading into the author’s texts

• move the reader competently but mechanically through a straightforward presentation of ideas and issues; the text may be formulaic, in the mode of the 5-paragraph theme; paraphrase and repetition may take the place of development
• include opening strategies that rely directly on the assignment sheets or use a version of a funnel strategy; conclusions tend to summarize the preceding ideas
• include sentences of a fairly uniform type and length; standard word choice; infrequent use of metaphor and analogy; generally appropriate tone; and a generically competent voice

• demonstrates the writer’s ability to competently analyze his/her writing, providing examples to support the analysis, and exploring how the texts were revised, especially noting the use of teacher and peer comments

• multiple drafts, questions for response, responses from classmates, complete responses to classmates’ drafts, substantive revisions, competent editing, and sound unit analyses
• individual papers that are long enough to successfully engage the tasks, generally 5-7 pages, though this may differ depending on the projects and based on discussion with the instructor
• consistent evidence of the writer’s ability to complete all assigned work promptly
• Incomplete portfolios may not be graded C.

• although not necessarily perfect, are virtually free of the kinds of errors that compromise the rhetorical effectiveness of the pieces, and have virtually no stigmatized errors

• offer responses to the reading of published texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• offer useful responses to classmates’ texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• incorporate the reading of student and professional texts into his/her writing processes
• revise at any level

• perform competently in most rhetorical situations, suggesting s/he will have difficulty handling many writing tasks
• choose topics and address them appropriately
• produce texts which identify and address various audiences, frequently assuming more or less of the readers than is appropriate
• accomplish reasonable purposes in relation to his/her chosen topics and audiences

• writing that may be competent but never compelling, reflecting the writer’s inability or unwillingness to move beyond mundane ideas, strategies, perspectives, etc.
• writing that substitutes paraphrase and repetition for any real development of ideas or discussion of issues
  and through the writer’s difficulty
• stating ideas clearly and effectively, providing only minimal support for assertions, and almost never addressing the complexity of issues, often appearing unaware of them
• describing phenomena or events clearly and/or analyzing and interpreting their possible meanings

Use of Resources*

*Sources must be used ethically & documented appropriately.

Writer’s inability/ unwillingness to

• use human, internet, and library resources at various stages of his/her writing processes
• draw upon experience and observations of the world and connect these to readings or to new situations. Even if such connections are made, they are not generally integrated or explored.
• use outside readings. Even if such readings are used, they are used in a consistently cut-and-paste fashion rather than an organic one.
• there is little or no evidence of the critical and analytical reading of assigned texts, suggesting difficulty summarizing complex ideas and responding critically or interpretively

• often require the reader to search for connections between ideas and guess at the writer’s intent; as a result, readers may be tempted to abandon the text without finishing it, seeing little to be gained from a sustained effort
• may not offer any opening strategy per se or may offer openings that seem unrelated to the rest of the text; may lack a sense of closure
• may include incomprehensible sentences or boundary problems; incorrect or inappropriate word choice; no use of metaphor or analogy; and an inappropriate tone and/or voice

• suggests that the writer is unwilling or unable to competently analyze his/her writing

• only some multiple drafts, questions for response, responses from classmates, and/or responses to classmates’ drafts; little or no evidence of substantive revision; insufficient editing, and weak unit analyses
• individual papers that are often shorter than necessary to successfully engage the tasks
• evidence of the writer’s unwillingness or inability to complete assigned work promptly
• Incomplete portfolios may be graded D.

• display some of the kinds of errors that compromise the rhetorical effectiveness of individual works and may have some stigmatized errors, even a pattern of such errors

• offer responses to the reading of published texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• offer useful responses to classmates’ texts, orally, in writing, and electronically via e-mail, on-line discussions, etc.
• incorporate the reading of student and professional texts into his/her writing processes
• revise at any level

• perform competently in any rhetorical situations, suggesting s/he will be unable to handle most writing tasks
• choose topics and address them appropriately
• produce texts which identify and address various audiences
• accomplish even the most basic purposes in his/her writing

• writing that is rarely competent and never compelling
• writing that consists largely of a series of unrelated statements or passages unified only by a common topic or theme

and through the writer’s inability/ unwillingness to

• provide support for claims or ideas or address or acknowledge perspectives other than his/her own
• describe phenomena or events clearly or analyze and interpret their possible meanings
  

Use of Resources

Writer’s inability/unwillingness to

• use human, internet, and library resources at any stage of his/her writing processes
• draw upon personal experience and observations of the world and connect these to readings or to new situations
• use outside readings
• there is essentially no evidence of the reading of assigned texts or of the ability to summarize ideas and respond critically or interpretively

• consistently requiring the reader to search for connections between ideas and guess at the writer’s intent; as a result, readers may be tempted to abandon the text without finishing it, seeing little to be gained from a sustained effort
• may lack any sense of opening or closure
• frequently include consistently incomprehensible sentences or multiple boundary problems; incorrect or inappropriate word choice; no use of metaphor or analogy; and an inappropriate tone and/ or voice

• fails to analyze the writer’s work in the course

• only some multiple drafts, questions for response, responses from classmates, and/or responses to classmates’ drafts; no evidence of revision, editing, or analysis
• individual papers that are consistently shorter than necessary to successfully engage the tasks
• no evidence of the writer’s willingness or ability to complete assigned work promptly
• Incomplete portfolios may be graded F.

• display the kinds of errors that compromise the rhetorical effectiveness of individual works and may well have patterns of stigmatized errors