ENG4U Final Comparative Essay Rubric
Name _____________________________
| Item | Value | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level 4 4+ | Mark |
| Thesis (Thinking/Inquiry) | 5 | Thesis does not anticipate the argument clearly. No mention of authors or texts. | Thesis somewhat anticipates the argument. Improper mention of author or texts. | Thesis anticipates the argument clearly. Author and texts included. | Exceptional, well structured thesis. Well developed and arguable. Concise, clear, relevant, specific and as a whole, a reasonably sound basis with which to base essay | |
| Intro – Hook, texts, topic & Supporting Statements. (Thinking/Inquiry) | 10 | Hook unclear or missing. Authors and texts may not be complete or missing altogether. Topic vague and unclear. Supporting statements do not anticipate body section. | Hook may be vague or off topic. Authors and texts mentioned but lack clarity or fluency in writing. Supporting statements somewhat anticipate body statements. May be confusing or off topic | Includes basic hook that isn’t overstated and is on topic. Intros authors and texts. Topic is introduced clearly. Supporting statements anticipate body statements. | Hook captures attention of reader – on topic, focused, Clearly introduces texts and authors. Topic clear and focused. Supporting statements/arguments clearly anticipate body statements. | |
| Paragraph Structure (Thinking/Inquiry) | 15 | Weak or no topic sentences, transition/conclusion sentences. Much oo long or too short. | Topic and/or transition/ conclusion sentences somewhat effective. Somewhat long or short as a whole. One or both paragraphs fail to include all aspects of proper structure. | Effective topic and transition/conclusion introduces paragraph. Paragraphs structured fairly well – easy to follow – all points included. | Both are effective and well structured paragraphs. Few to no errors in format, transitions, topic sentences. Point (context), evidence, expl. & analysis all included Effective transitions and concluding statements. | |
| Logic of Argument (Thinking/Inquiry) | 30 | Argument is weak, scattered,non-sequential. Ideas poorly devel | Argument is somewhat coherent and sequential. Ideas are somewhat developed. | Argument is coherent and sequential. Ideas are well developed. | Argument is very coherent and sequential. Ideas are exceptionally well devel. | |
| Comparison of Texts (Thinking/Inquiry) | Poor grounds for comparison. Comparison not clear; relation between texts tenuous. | Somewhat good grounds for comparison. Somewhat clear comparisons and connections between texts. | Good grounds for comparison. Clear comparison and connection between texts. | Excellent grounds for comparison. Excellent comparison and connection between texts. | ||
| Evidence (Knowledge) | Evidence are not relevant, present or properly integrated. Not clear | Evidence are somewhat relevant and properly integrated. Somewhat clear | Evidence strengthen the argument and are well integrated. Mostly clear | Exceptional use of evidence. Very well integrated & clear. | ||
| Style (Communication) | 20 | Poor stylistic elements. Informal language, 1st person voice, contractions, weak vocabulary, etc. | Decent stylistic elements. Sometimes strong, fluid, formal acad voice – POV, tense, diction, sent struc. | Good stylistic elements. Mostly strong, fluid, formal acad voice – POV, tense, diction, sent struc. | Exceptional stylistic elements. Strong, fluid, formal acad voice – POV, tense, diction, sent struc. | |
| Grammar/Spelling (Application) | 5 | Many errors – significant editing needed | Many errors or some errors that do distract reader | Some errors but do not detract from communication | Few to no errors. | |
| Outline (KU/App/TI) | 15 | Missing or incomplete outline. Not basis for essay | Decent outline with some weak or missing elements. More evidence detail needed | A good outline. Solid basis for essay. Some points need more detail/evidence | An exceptional outline Basis for exceptional essay. All points included |
Total: /100