Skip to main content
iRubric: Rhetorical Analysis: Letter from Birmingham Jail rubric

iRubric: Rhetorical Analysis: Letter from Birmingham Jail rubric

find rubric

(draft) edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Rhetorical Analysis: Letter from Birmingham Jail 
Rubric Code: HX2456A
By ksorise
Draft
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: (none)

Powered by iRubric Rhetorical Analysis: Letter from Bi
Enter rubric description
  100-90

4 pts

89-80

3 pts

79-70

2 pts

69-60

1 pts

point totals

(N/A)

Introduction thesis, & conclusion

x6
100-90

Intro provides context for the rest of the paper; thesis is explicit and
clear; conclusion recasts thesis and provides cohesion to whole
paper

24-19
89-80

Either intro provides
insufficient context for the rest of the paper, thesis is lacking in clarity, OR conclusion fails to recast thesis effectively


18-13
79-70

Intro provides little context for the paper; thesis is implicit and hard to find; conclusion makes insufficient reference
to thesis


12-7
69-60

Intro does not provide context for the paper; thesis is undetectable; conclusion seems unrelated to the rest of the paper


6-0
point totals
Rhetorical triangle and rhetorical

x7
100-90

Source text is thoroughly and
effectively contextualized with well supported analysis of structure, rhetorical triangle (audience,
author, purpose), and rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, logos)

28-22
89-80

Contextualization and analysis of source text is good and somewhat supported but could
be improved






21-15
79-70

Incomplete contextualization
and analysis of source text;
parts of rhetorical triangle or appeals may be missing; little support is provided





14-8
69-60

Poor contextualization and analysis of source text; not supported by examples







7-0
point totals
Organization

x5
100-90

Smooth flow of ideas ordered in a logical sequence that effectively
guides the reader; each paragraph has a well-supported clearly-stated
main point

20-16
89-80

Flow of ideas could be more effectively sequenced; most
paragraphs have clear and
supported main point



15-11
79-70

Ideas do not always flow in a logical, cohesive manner;
paragraphs do not have clear and supported main idea



10-6
69-60

Sequence of ideas and
paragraphs seems aimless
and haphazard





5-0
point totals
Audience Awareness

x4
100-90

Engages audience throughout
paper




16-13
89-80

Engages audience through
most of the paper; can capture
but not sustain interest


12-9
79-70

May appeal to a limited
audience; has little engaging
qualities



8-5
69-60

Neither captures nor sustains interest; may be overly emotional and opinionated to engage audience

4-0
point totals
Language use & mechanics

x3
100-90

Superior editing – limited errors spelling, grammar, word order, word usage, sentence structure, and punctuation; good use of
academic English


12-10
89-80

Good editing – few errors per page in spelling, grammar, word order, word usage, sentence structure, and punctuation; very few
problems with using academic English

9-7
79-70

Careless editing – several
errors per paragraph in
spelling, grammar, word
order, word usage, sentence structure, and punctuation;
informal language used in
multiple instances

6-4
69-60

No editing – many errors throughout in spelling, grammar, word order, word usage, sentence structure, and punctuation; informal or inappropriate language

3-0
point totals
MLA citation

x2
100-90

Near perfect use of MLA guide.




8-7
89-80

There are minor errors in the use of MLA in-text citations





6-5
79-70

There are several consistent errors in the use of in-text citations - what kind of errors also plays a part


4-3
69-60

There are excessive errors in most sentences that compromise clarity.



2-0
point totals
Peer Edit

x6
100-90

Excellent read of peer essay, thoughtful and relevant suggestions based on language, structure and style. Helped to improve the overall strength of the essay

24-19
89-80

Solid read of peer essay. Good suggestions were made to enhance language and structure. Overall, the editor helped to strengthen the essay


18-13
79-70

Fair read of peer essay. Few to minimal suggestions were made to enhance language and structure. Overall, the editor did little to help improve the essay


12-7
69-60

Poor read of peer essay. Few to no suggestions were made to enhance the overall language, clarity, and structure. This editor did not help to improve this essay.

6-0
point totals




Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
This rubric is still in draft mode and cannot be scored. Please change the rubric status to ready to use.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n60