Skip to main content

iRubric: AP Argument Rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
AP Argument Rubric AP Argument Rubric This rubric is designed so that individual pieces of the essay can be graded seperately. Essays or individual categories that are blank, off-topic, or illegible will receieve a 0 score. Rubric Code: W537X9 By mautau2776 Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: English Type: Writing Grade Levels: 9-12

AP Argument Rubric Write an essay that defends, challenges or qualifies the position. Support your argument with appropriate evidence from your reading, observation, or experience.
	Extra Effective 100/50/25 9 pts	Effective 96/48/24 8 pts	Less Effective but More Than Adequa 92/46/23 7 pts	Adequate 86/43/21 6 pts	Less Adequate 78/39/19 5 pts	Indequate 72/36/18 4 pts	Less Inadequate 64/32/16 3 pts	Little Success 60/30/15 2 pts	Simplistic/Very weak! 50/25/12 1 pts
Overall 9 pts This will be determined based on the average score of individual grading categories, regardless of how many categories are graded. This may also be used as an overall essay grade when individual categories are not used.	Extra Effective Sophisticated in argument through their development, or particularly impressive in their control of language.	Effective Effectively defend, challenge or qualify. The evidence and explanations are appropriate and convincing. The prose demonstrates a consistent ability to control a wide range of elements of effective writing	Less Effective but More Than Adequa Fit the description of a 6 but provide a more complete explanation, more thorough development, or a more mature prose style.	Adequate Adequately defend, challenge or qualify. The evidence and explanations are appropirate and sufficient. The writing may contain lapses in dictio nor syntax but generally the prose is clear.	Less Adequate Adequate position that defends, challenges or qualifies, but the evidence or explanations used may be unever, in consistent, or limited. The writing may contain lapses in diction or syntax, but it usually contains the author's ideas.	Indequate Inadequately defends, challenges or qualifies. The evidence or explanations may be inappropriate, insufficient, or less convincing. The prose generally conveys the writers ideas but may be less consistent in controlling the elements of effective writing.	Less Inadequate Demonstrate less success than a 4 in defending, challenging, or qualifying. The papers show less maturity in control of writing.	Little Success Demonstrate little success in defending, challenging, or qualifying. These papers may misunderstand the prompt, or substitute a simple task by responding to the prompt tangentially with unrelated, inaccurate, or inappropriate explanation. The prose often demonstrates weaknesses in writing, such as grammatical problems, a lack of development or organization, or a lack of control.	Simplistic/Very weak! Undeveloped, especially simplistic in their explanation and argument, or weak in their control of language.
Introduction 9 pts Focus is on the introduction and/or narration pieces of the essay and understanding of prompt.	Extra Effective Introduction is skillfully written to engage the audience and make them receptive. Prompt is clearly understood and addressed in a sophisticated manner. The central claim is well crafted, clearly stated, argumentative in nature, and clearly defends, challenges, or qualifies the issue at hand in a more eloquent fashion than an 8 response. All necessary background information is included.	Effective Introduction is well written and engages the audience and makes them receptive. Prompt is clearly understood and addressed in an original manner. The central claim is well crafted, clearly stated, argumentative in nature, and clearly defends, challenges, or qualifies the issue at hand. All necessary background information is included.	Less Effective but More Than Adequa Introduction is well written and engages the audience and attempts to make them receptive. Prompt is clearly understood and addressed. The central claim is well-written and clearly takes a position that defends, challenges, or qualifies the issue at hand. Most background information is included.	Adequate Introduction attempts to engage the audience and/or make them receptive. Prompt is mostly understood and addressed. The central claim takes a positition that defends, challenges, or qualifies the issue at hand but may awkward. Some background information is included.	Less Adequate Introduction makes a limited attempt at engaging the audience in some fashion. Prompt is understood somewhat but may not be fully addressed. The central claim takes a position that either defends, challenges, or qualifies an issue but is slightly off topic, awkwardly cponstructed, or unclear. Limited background information.	Indequate Attempt to engage the audience awkward or vague. Prompt is somewhat misunderstood but partially addressed. The central claim is inappropriate, weak, or unclear. No background information.	Less Inadequate Little or no attempt to engage the audience. An attempt to address the prompt is made but it is clearly misunderstood. Their is an attempt at a central claim but it is unclear or weakly constructed. There is no background information.	Little Success No attempt to engage the audience. The prompt is completely misunderstood and/or not addressed. the central claim is not argumentatively based and does to defend, challenge, or qualify any issue. There is no background information.	Simplistic/Very weak! Makes not attempt to engage the audience, or engages an inapproriate audience. Prompt is not addressed at all, demonstrating a clear misunderstanding of expectations. There is not central claim.
Organization, Diction and Syntax 9 pts Focus is on language choice, usage, grammar, and mechanics.	Extra Effective Clearly and artfully ordered. Rich and substantive sentence construction that is more sophisticated than a score of 8. Variety of diction and syntax enhances style and effect. Rich, effective vocabulary. No errors in structure, usage, or mechanics	Effective Organization enhances meaning. Rich and substantive sentence construction. Variety of diction and syntax enhances style and effect. Rich, effective vocabulary. Few or no errors in structure, usage, or mechanics	Less Effective but More Than Adequa Clearly focused and skillful development of ideas. Sophisticated sentence patterns. Appropriate variety of diction and syntax. Generally uses rich, effective vocabulary. Limited errors in structure, usage, or mechanics	Adequate Mostly focused. Development of ideas is effective. Attempts sophisticated language and varied sentence patterns. Consitent use of good vocabualry. Some errors in either structure, usage, or mechanics	Less Adequate Somewhat focused. Development of ideas is somewhat effective. Some sentence variety. Acceptable vocabulay. Some errors in structure, usage, or mechanics.	Indequate Inconsistent focus. Development of ideas is somewhat ineffective. Limited sentence variety and/or simple vocabulary. Errors in structure, usage, or mechanics start to interfere with meaning.	Less Inadequate Limited or no focus. Development of ideas is ineffective. Relies on simple sentence patterns. Repetitive structure or awkward syntax. Errors in structure, usage, and/or mechanics effect meaning.	Little Success Clearly unorganized. Simple vocabulary. Frequently uses the wrong word choice. Construction of sentences or paragraphs is illogical. Errors in structure, usage, and/or mechanics severely impact meaning.	Simplistic/Very weak! Errors in usage, mechanics, and structure are so severe that almost no meaning is discerned. Completely illogical.
Development of Argument 9 pts Focus is on the development of the argument- the warrants, backing, evidence, and conditions of rebuttal.	Extra Effective Reasons and evidence are astute, sophisticated, persuasive, and poignantly relevant, drawing on their reading, observations, past studies or experiences. Warrants and backings are eloquently considered. Conditions of rebuttal show keen insight and eloquently contribute to the persuasiveness of the argument. Argument is fully developed and is overwhelmingly effective at supporting the central claim.	Effective Reasons and evidence are sophisticated, persuasive, and relevant, drawing on their reading, observations, past studies or experiences. Warrants and backings are effectively considered. Conditions of rebuttal show keen insight and contribute to the persuasiveness of the argument. Argument is fully developed and very effective at supporting the central claim.	Less Effective but More Than Adequa Reasons and evidence are persuasive and relevant, drawing on their reading, observations, past studies or experiences. Warrants and backings are clearly considered. Conditions of rebuttal contribute to the persuasiveness of the argument. Argument effectively supports the central claim.	Adequate Reasons and evidence are adequately persuasive and relevant, drawing on their reading, observations, past studies or experiences. There is some evidence of warrants and backings. Conditions of rebuttal are limited. Argument does a fairly good job supporting the central claim.	Less Adequate Argument is insufficiently developed and does little to support the claim. Reasons and/or evidence are not all relevant or persuasive. Warrants are missing backing when needed and/or warrants are not addressed when necessary. Opposing perspectives are rarely considered.	Indequate Argument is flawed or illogical. Reasons are mostly irrelevant and little evidence is used to support them. Warrants are wrong or missing when needed. Opposing perspectives are overly simplistic or wrong, if present.	Less Inadequate Argument is not developed. Reasons are illogical. Little or no evidence. Does not stay on topic in relation to the central claim. No warrants, backing, or conditions of rebuttal.	Little Success Argument is not developed. Claim is not supported. Evidence is irrelevant or missing. No warrants or backing. No conditions of rebuttal.	Simplistic/Very weak! Reads more like a report than an argument. There is no effort to support the central claim.
Style and Voice 9 pts Focus is on the patterns of organization, methods of persuasion employed, effectiveness of tone, and overall implementation of rhetorical strategies.	Extra Effective Sophisticated sense of audience. Artfully incorporates a wide variety of rhetorical strategies that are both tropes and schemes. Consistently conveys a highly academic tone, always addressing both hostile and receptive audiences with respect. Skillfully asserts authority on the topic.	Effective Effective sense of audience. Incorporates a wide variety of rhetorical strategies that are both tropes and schemes. Consistently conveys a highly academic tone, always addressing both hostile and receptive audiences with respect. Asserts authority on the topic.	Less Effective but More Than Adequa Understands the audience. Incorporates a variety of rhetorical strategies that are either tropes and schemes. Consistently conveys an academic and respectful tone. Come accross as somewhat of an authority on the topic.	Adequate Somewhat understands the audience. Incorporates some rhetorical strategies that are either tropes and schemes. Somewhat consistently conveys an academic and respectful tone. Does little to come across as an authority on the topic.	Less Adequate Understanding of audience is limited. Incorporates a few rhetorical strategies. Inconsitently conveys an academic and respectful tone. Does not come across as an authority on the topic.	Indequate Makes an attempt to understand the audience. One or two rhetorical strategies are used. Tone is elementary and/or inconsistent. Does not come across as an authority on the topic.	Less Inadequate Does not understand the audience. Rhetorical strategies detract from purpose. Tone is elementary and/or inappropriate. Comes across as not caring about the topic.	Little Success Attempt at rhetorical strategies is flawed or has the opposite effect. Tone comes across as inappropriate or rude. Does very little to address the audience.	Simplistic/Very weak! Comes across as rude. Does not take the audience into account at all. Contains no rhetorical devices. Comes across as unknowledgable on the topic.
Conclusion 9 pts Focus is on the concluding paragraph and its tie back to the thesis.	Extra Effective Makes a sophisticated and eloquent summary of the arguments. Arouses sympathy for the topic and motivates the audience to action. Effectively enhances ethos and makes use of emotional appeals.	Effective Makes a sophisticated summary of the arguments. Arouses sympathy for the topic and motivates the audience to action. Effectively ehances ethos and makes use of emotional appeals.	Less Effective but More Than Adequa Clearly summarizes the arguments. Attempts to arouse sympathy for the topic and motivate the audience to action. Attempts to ehance ethos and makes use of emotional appeals.	Adequate Clearly summarizes the arguments and reinforces the thesis. Motivates the audience to action. Makes a limited attempt to ehance ethos and/or make use of emotional appeals.	Less Adequate Summary of the arguments and thesis is somewhat clear. Attempts to appeal to the audience either by calling them to action, appealing to ethos, or appealing to pathos.	Indequate Summary of the arguments is limited. Awkward tie back to thesis. Ineffective attempt to appeal to audience in any fashion.	Less Inadequate Summary of the arguments is unclear. Conclusion is awkwardly organized. Tie back to thesis is awkward or unclear. Too wordy. Off topic.	Little Success No summary of arguments. Tie back to thesis is not clear. Does not wrap the essay up.	Simplistic/Very weak! Simple restatement of thesis. No summary of arguments.

Subjects:

English

Types:

Writing

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More English rubrics

More Writing rubrics

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

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 iRubric^tm.

n202