Grading Criteria—Please note that one-quarter (25 points) of each
paper grade is dependent on administrative factors such as whether the paper
meets the assignment specifications. An outstanding paper that is
significantly too short, does not fully address the assignment, or was not
properly drafted is automatically a 75, before other standards are applied to the grading process.
A=90-100 Range—
□
Thesis is specific, arguable, stated early in the paper, and
clearly addresses the assignment.
□
Organization is clear, logical, and graceful, with appropriate
transitions throughout. All ideas/points
are developed thoroughly and
logically.
□
Claims are debatable, and supported with specific examples
from the film, focusing on individual scenes rather than plot summary. Historical
claims are supported with documented evidence.
□
MLA format and
documentation are flawless in every detail.
□
Academic style
and voice are formal, with a clear
sense of audience and authoritative persona.
No second person, slang, clichés, or “just because…does not mean”
sentences are present. Parentheses are
restricted to in-text citations.
□
Sentences are very well-crafted—clear and concise. No fragments, run-ons, dangling modifiers,
awkward/unclear wording, or incorrect use of tense(s) are present. Word choice is appropriate and demonstrates
collegiate vocabulary.
□
Detail-level
proofreading is nearly flawless (in
general, no more than 1 minor error per page).
□
Conclusion adequately invokes the main points and thesis of the
paper. Broad, general statements that do
not support the specific goal of the paper are avoided. No new points are introduced therein.
□
Thesis is specific, arguable, and clearly addresses the
assignment.
□
Organization is clear and logical with an attempt at graceful
transition. Most ideas/points are
developed thoroughly and logically.
□
Claims are supported with specific examples from the film,
focusing on scenes rather than plot summary.
□
Documentation is for the most part correct. A works cited page is present and nearly
flawless.
□
Academic style
and voice are formal, with a clear
sense of audience and authoritative persona.
Flaws are minor and infrequent.
□
Sentences are for the most part well-crafted—generally A-level
understanding with some lapses in practice.
□
Detail-level
proofreading is evident, and
remaining errors are relatively few and not distracting.
□
Conclusion invokes the thesis or main points of the paper and
generally avoids excessive language that detracts from its specificity. No new
points are introduced therein.
□
Thesis clearly addresses the assignment.
□
A clear
organizational structure is evident
and in use. Several points need
development, explanation.
□
Claims are supported with examples from the film, but some
plot summary is evident.
□
Documentation is flawed, but partly coheres to MLA standards. A works cited page is present.
□
Paper shows an
attempt to develop style and voice appropriate to an academic audience—as
exhibited by competent word choice and a relatively consistent persona.
□
Sentences are clear but show inconsistencies.
□
Detail-level
proofreading is evident, and errors
do not significantly affect meaning or credibility.
□
Conclusion retains some specificity but is laden with
generalities. No new points are
introduced therein.
D=60-69 Range----
□
Thesis is not clear, doesn’t address the assignment.
□
Organization is not clear or logical. Points are rarely developed well.
□
Claims are mostly supported with plot summary, some specific
scenes may be referred to.
□
Documentation is present in some form. A works cited or bibliography page is
present.
□
Voice is largely informal, not particularly academic.
□
Sentences and
grammar are error-ridden, seriously
lacking clarity and credibility.
□
Conclusion is general, doesn’t contain any information specific
to the paper’s argument. No new points
are introduced therein.