Skip to main content

iRubric: Argumentative Essay rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Argumentative Essay 
Multi-genre Project Research MLA Paper
Submit one 2.5-4 page typed paper, double spaced, 12 point font following MLA guidelines. Include a Works Cited page citing at least 3 resources used researching the argument. (use quotes from all 3). Quotes can not be more than 4 lines and you must have 2 per body paragraph. Paper will be graded on quality of research to support the argument, use of information gained through research, credibility of sources, content, grammar/mechanics, rhetorical appeals, and bibliography.
Rubric Code: VXA37X8
By kcarbon2
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: 9-12, Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Essay Overall
  Excellent

10 pts

Good

6 pts

Fair

4 pts

Poor

2 pts

Quality of research

Excellent

--Cited multiple sources throughout paper
--All information relevant to topic and thesis
--Sufficient information provided to support all elements of topic.
--Research in-depth and the beyond the obvious, revealing new insights gained.
-- Research clearly aims to answer the question "Why should I agree with you?"
Good

--Citations missing in paper, but are found at the end in the works cited page
--Sources mostly reliable. Citation errors minor.
--Most information relevant to thesis.
--Sufficient information provided
--Research of sufficient depth.
Fair

--Failed to cite some sources
--Some source reliability questionable. Omitted citation information does not interfere with ability of reader to find the source.
--Some information relevant to thesis.
--Information provided to support some elements of topic
Poor

--Failed to cite sources
--Source reliability questionable. Can't find source of information.
--Not much information relevant to thesis.
--Surface research / summarizing the topic
Direct Quotes and Citations

Excellent

--Sources reliable and properly cited with MLA citation
--Quotes follow the "Quote Sandwich" technique: Introduce, Quote, Explain
--Quotes provide quality information that could not have been paraphrased or instantly Googled
--At least two quotes provided per body paragraph
Good

--Sources either questionably reliable or improperly cited for MLA
--Quotes attempt to follow the "Quote Sandwich" technique, but are lacking somewhat
--Quotes could have been paraphrased or easily found in Google
--Two quotes provided, but missing something from the "Quote Sandwich"
Fair

--Unreliable sources or no citation
--Quotes failed to follow the "Quote Sandwich" technique, missing important aspects of this technique
--Quotes could have been paraphrased or easily found in Google
--Only one quote per paragraph
Poor

--Plagiarized either through lack of citation or indication that the information came from anywhere else
--No attempt at the quote sandwich
--Quotes are unimportant and do not add to the research paper
-- Only one quote or missing quotes entirely.
Content

Excellent

--Topic is arguable, currently debated, and controversial in nature.
--Write uses ethos, pathos, and logos to attempt persuasion.
--Writer involved with subject, not merely doing an assignment.
--Clear and appropriate organization, with effective transitions, introduction, and conclusion.
Good

--Topic is arguable, but possibly not relevant or clearly argued.
--Write tries to use ethos, pathos, and/or logos to attempt persuasion.
--Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion slightly lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.
Fair

--Topic is not clearly arguable, or too outdated to use.
--Write attempts only one of the rhetorical appeals
--Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.
Poor

--Topic too broad or narrow for length of paper and/or a poor topic for argumentative papers.
--No clear attempt at ethos, pathos, or logos
--Support for thesis barely sufficient, and/or.
--Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.
Persuasion

Excellent

--Position is clearly stated from the writer in the beginning
--Writer clearly outlines an argument in favor of their side
--A persuasive conclusion is provided.
Good

--Position statement is possibly stated, but not clear or left unsupported
--Writer attempts to outlines an argument in favor of their side
--A persuasive conclusion is provided, but may have structural differences (leaning towards traditional conclusion)
Fair

--Position statement is either unstated or unsupported
--Writer is contradictory in their position on the argument
--The conclusion is not particularly persuasive in nature and rather just summarizes the paper or argument.
Poor

--Position is unclear
--Writer is not clearly persuasive toward one side or the other
--Conclusion is not persuasive in nature
MLA Format / Works Cited

Excellent

--All sources properly cited in both paper and works cited.
-- Header correct with page numbers
-- Heading correct
-- Title format correct
-- Double Spaced
-- 12 point TNR Font
-- No spaces between paragraphs
-- Left aligned with indentations
Good

--All sources properly cited in both paper and works cited.
-- 2 errors in format.
Fair

--Not all sources properly cited in both paper and works cited.
-- More than than 3 errors in format.
Poor

-- No works cited page (zero points)
-- More than than 4 errors in format (between 1 - 2 points)
Grammar and Mechanics

Excellent

--Consistent and appropriate voice.
-- Sophisticated and precise word choice.
--1 or less spelling errors.
--1 or less errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- 1 or less punctuation or capitalization errors.
--Met all min/max page requirements
Good

-- Voice mostly consistent and appropriate.
-- Fairly effective word choice.
-- 2-3 spelling errors.
-- 2-3 errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- 2-3 punctuation or capitalization errors.
--Close to meeting min/max page requirements
Fair

-- Voice somewhat consistent and appropriate.
-- Correct word choice.
--More than 3 spelling errors.
--More than 3 errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- More than 3 punctuation or capitalization errors.
--1 page short of min/max page requirements
Poor

-- Voice somewhat consistent and appropriate.
-- Uninteresting word choice.
--More than 4 spelling errors.
--More than 3 errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- More than 4 punctuation or capitalization errors.
Failed to meet min/max page requirements
Plagiarism

Excellent

-Student's work is original
- sources cited and not paraphrased
-reliable sources-
-does not heavily rely on unreliable sources
Good

-Student's work is not original
- Relies heavily on paraphrasing
- and/or questionable sources
Fair

Student copies and pastes information with citation
Poor

Student's work is merely copied and pasted from sources without citation
Body Of Essay
  Excellent

5 pts

Good

4 pts

Fair

3 pts

Poor

2 pts

Body Paragraphs

Excellent

--Body paragraphs clearly follow the checklist with a topic sentence, 2 explained pieces of evidence, and a conclusion or transition statement.
--BP is approximately 8-10 sentences long.
Good

--Body paragraph may be missing 1-2 elements of the checklist.
--BP is fewer sentences than expected
Fair

--Body paragraph may be missing 3-4 elements of the checklist.
--BP is fewer sentences than expected
Poor

--Body paragraph is missing many elements of the checklist.
--BP is not long enough to support claims.
Counterargument / Counterclaim

Excellent

--Counterclaim effectively outlines what the other side may say in response to the argument at hand
--It contains all of the elements from the checklist
--The counterargument is clearly responded to in this same paragraph.
Good

--Counterclaim attempts to outline what the other side may say in response to the argument at hand
--It contains most or some of the elements from the checklist
--The counterargument is responded to in this same paragraph.
Fair

--Counterclaim may show the other side, but possibly compromises the overall argument.
--It contains some of the elements from the checklist
--The writer attempts to respond to the counterargument in the same paragraph.
Poor

--Counterclaim compromises the overall argument.
--It contains few of the elements from the checklist
--The writer does not respond to the counterargument in the same paragraph.



Keywords:
  • Research paper - emphasis on relevance of research



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
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
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.

n202