{October 5, 2009}   blog entry #10
Criteria/ Quality






Total Points
   Content: amount of information presented  

  Little or    incomplete information given in article.

     Some information; more complete thoughts.   More information mostly completed thoughts.    Ample information and fully completed thoughts.   


   Support/ Reasoning: Ideas and details    Little or no details; incomplete ideas.    Few details and ideas.     Some details along with more ideas with topic.    Very detailed information linking the ideas to the topic.   



   Organization: Information flows well

       No transitions and is not fully focused or consistent.     Some transitions; little consistency and focus.      More transitions and consistency but not fully focused.   Good use of transitions; very consistent and focused.   



  Style: Language used

    Use of slang words and informal wording of sentences.    Inconsistent tone; no variety of wordings.    Some variety in sentence structure; generally appropriate tone.    Varied sentence structures and advanced tone.   


   Voice: Presentation of information     Improper formatting; inconsistent voice.    Some formatting errors and inconsistency in voice patterns.    Few formatting errors; more consistent voice patterns.    Little or no formatting errors; keeping single voice pattern   


   Conventions: Grammar, punctuation, etc.    Many punctuation and grammatical errors.   Some punctuation and   grammatical errors but writers thoughts are somewhat clear.     Few punctuation and grammatical errors but doesn’t interfere with writers ideas or thoughts.     Little or no errors allowing writers thoughts to be clear.   


  Documentation: Research and citing    Little or no citation used and too much use of quotations; no variety of sources.    Citation used but incorrectly formatted; lacks variety of sources.    Some citations used correctly; some variety of sources used.    Most information cited correctly with much variety in sources.   



The content of the article was good, the authors thoughts about the topic were clear

support /reasoning-details were given but not much was given to support the claim

organization-flows very well, easy to understand

style-not much of sentence transitions and language used was consistent

voice- was singular, kept a constent tone through out the paper


documentation-little variety, only one main source making it one sided and not complete citations


hilliardbenjaminwnzq says:

Good rubric however I think you gave the author to much credit

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

et cetera
%d bloggers like this: