Breadcrumb Navigation:

Home > Academics > Hybrid Courses > For Faculty > Course Redesign > Online Communication > ENG 112 Grading Rubric

ENG 112 Grading Rubric for Discussions

Note: A portion of every score considers peer feedback as part of its weight. Failure to have the required feedback will result in point deductions.

90%-100%

The writing goes completely beyond the minimum requirement of the assignment in both content and thought. (Word count exceeds, requirement by 100 or more words for initial post requirement.) The writing engages the reader with an original approach to the subject. It may encompass conflicting ideas and inspires the reader to contemplate the relationship of complex ideas. Language is precise. The writing is free of grammatical, proofreading, and stylistic errors. All quoted material is properly documented and cited. Two or more substantial peer responses of 50-100 words that are engaging and advance the discussion board’s learning objective are present.

80%-89%

The writing goes slightly beyond the minimum requirements of the assignment or thought shows greater potential than average. It attempts to engage the reader through originality and presentation of complex ideas. Minor gaps in logic and argument may appear. The writing is organized logically and flows well. The writing keeps the reader’s attention. Language chosen is appropriate to the subject, but may call attention to itself in minor ways. The writing may exhibit a few minor errors in grammar or style, but may not impair the flow of the reading. Quoted material is properly documented and cited. The writing contains sentences that are complete or imply unstated connections and/or conclusions. Main ideas can be distinguished from supporting evidence with some effort. Required peer responses of 50-100 words that engage and advance the discussion board’s learning objective are present.

70%-79%

The writing meets the minimum requirements of the assignment. It offers insight into the subject through basic logic and the presentation of ideas based on some evidence. The writing has a clear thesis and related subordinate ideas supported by clear thinking and appropriate evidence. Logical arguments may be one-sided or incomplete. The writing is clear but could be expressed in a style more appropriate to the subject. It is jargon-free but may require a more complete explanation of some terms used or ideas expressed. The writing could benefit from additional proofreading, as some errors impede the flow of the reading. Sources are documented and cited but need to show greater consistency. Lacks peer response(s) or peer response(s) of 50-100 words or fewer that do(es) little to engage in the discussion board’s learning objective.

60%-69%

The writing fails to meet the minimum requirements of the assignment by more than half. It offers little insight into the subject and has serious flaws in logic and omissions in evidence. The writing may need a more clearly articulated thesis and/or appropriate related subordinate ideas. Fuzzy logic may be evident and adequate supporting evidence is lacking. The writing lacks clarity and is sometimes confusing. The language chosen is not appropriate to the subject or the assignment. The writing exhibits substantial errors in grammar and style so that the basic ideas are lost. Sources are overly quoted and not adequately documented or cited. Lacks peer response(s) or peer response(s) of 50-100 words or fewer that do(es) little to engage in the discussion board’s learning objective.

59% or Below

The writing fails to meet the minimum requirements of the assignment by more than two-thirds. This range also includes partial to complete plagiarism. The work offers no insight into the subject and has numerous and serious flaws in logic and omissions in evidence or is partially to completely plagiarized. The writing needs a clearly articulated original thesis and/or appropriate related subordinate ideas. Logic is so weak or is nonexistent or unfounded with no supporting evidence. The writing lacks clarity and is confusing. The writing exhibits substantial errors in grammar and style so that the basic ideas are lost. Sources are overly quoted and not adequately documented or cited. Lacks peer response(s) or peer response(s) of 50-100 words or fewer that do(es) little to engage in the discussion board’s learning objective.

Carol Froisy