Grading Rubric for the Experience-Based Theory Critique (EBTC) Essay

Teacher Name: Ms. Vilhotti
Student Name:     ________________________________________

Grader Name: __________________________________________

 

 

Category

4

3

2

1

Introduction 20%

Introduces the social science text to be analyzed: 1) author, 2) title, 3) topic, 4) rhetorical context. 5) Previews the author's theory and/or the purpose of his or her essay. 6) Includes a thesis statement that indicates students’ level of satisfaction with the theory as an explanation for a behavior; 7) student’s thesis addresses the theory specifically and not just the idea or topic of the theory.

Student is lacking 1-2 elements of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the introduction are powerfully written, 1-2 elements are less effective.

Student is lacking 3 elements of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the introduction are well written, 2-3 elements are less effective or are rather weak.

Student is lacking 3 or more of the “Level 4” criteria.  Much of the introduction is ineffective, unclear, or otherwise poorly written.

Analysis (body of the paper)

 

40%

1) Outlines the major points of the article and describes the theory.  2) Uses specific and appropriate examples from the text (brief summaries, paraphrases, direct quotes) to explain how the author of the theory has supported each point.  3) Applies the theory to at least one specific experience from life; 4) uses the terminology and definitions that the theoretician uses.  5) Critiques the theory in light of writer's experience, including both places where he/she thinks the theory provides an adequate, useful, or otherwise positive explanation and places where he/she finds the theory lacking (support, refute, qualify).  6) Student has used sufficient evidence from the text and his/her experience/knowledge to support his/her response.  7) Student employs a sophisticated and clearly well-planned “critique strategy” in applying life experience to the theory being critiqued.

Student is lacking 1-2 elements of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the analysis are powerfully written, 1-2 elements are less effective.

Student is lacking 3 elements of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the introduction are well written, 2-3 elements are less effective or are rather weak.

Student is lacking 3 or more of the “Level 4” criteria.  Much of the analysis is ineffective, unclear, or otherwise poorly written.

Response and Conclusion

20%

 

1) The final paragraphs respond to the author’s argument, offering further support for key points and/or noting exceptions, refinements, or challenges to the author’s claims.  2) The conclusion pulls the analysis together by reflecting on why this topic is important or relevant (to the college student audience) and 3) perhaps by offering suggestions for further study.

Student is lacking 1 element of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the response and conclusion are powerfully written, 1 element is less effective.

Student is lacking 2 elements of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the introduction are well written, 2 elements are less effective or are rather weak.

Student is lacking 3 of the “Level 4” criteria.  Much of the response and conclusion is ineffective, unclear, or otherwise poorly written.

Overall Presentation

20%

1) Evidence is well documented, 2) following APA format for in-text citations and 3) References list.  Paper reads 4) smoothly and 5) logically.  6) Grammar (pronoun-antecedent agreement, etc.) and 7) mechanics (spelling, homophone usage, punctuation, capitalization, etc.) have been carefully reviewed (final draft).

Student is lacking 1-2 elements of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the overall presentation are powerfully written, 1-2 elements are less effective.

Student is lacking 3-4 elements of the “Level 4” criteria.  While some of the elements of the introduction are well written, 2-3 elements are less effective or are rather weak.

Student is lacking 4 or more of the “Level 4” criteria.  Much of the overall presentation is ineffective, unclear, or otherwise poorly written.