iRubric: Writing Assignment Grading Rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

Writing Assignment Grading Rubric

This rubric is for grading student's written assignments in GB3012 Communications for Managers (Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA). Alan E. Nelson, Lecturer of Management

Rubric Code: H7C476

By aenelson

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Business

Type: Writing

Grade Levels: Graduate

Criterion
	Strong Growth Opportunities (N/A)	Room for Improvement (N/A)	Strong (N/A)	Very Strong (N/A)	Comments (N/A)
Content & Organization 30 % Quality of the what is said and how it is organized, so readers understand what they are reading.	Strong Growth Opportunities -Major points are addressed, but not well supported or discussed. -Confusing and/or says little	Room for Improvement - Content is accurate. - Content is mostly complete. - Lack of depth or development of thoughts or themes - Feel a bit lost reading it	Strong - Major points are stated clearly and are well supported. - Sequence is logical and understandable. - Reader benefits from the read.	Very Strong - Purpose of the writing is very clear. - Content is well organized so reader comprehends it well. - Good use of illustrations, stories and stats as needed	Comments
Clarity/Brevity of Words 20 % Word selection, avoidance of redundancy, and being clear; bottom line; high impact style.	Strong Growth Opportunities - Very wordy - Poor choice of words - Redundant - 30% overuse of words/obese writing - Muddy/foggy	Room for Improvement - Wordy - Fuzzy and unclear writing/ foggy in several places - Poor word choice - Approx. 20% bloated	Strong - Good use of words - Content is succinct and generally well worded - Approx. 10% fat content	Very Strong - Great word choice - Colorful use of verbs, nouns and illustrations - Very little fat; lean writing - High impact/clear	Comments
Structure 10 % Author, date and vital info is included. Outline helps readers organize it in their minds, such as subtitles, tight paragraphs, intro and conclusion.	Strong Growth Opportunities - Structure of the paper is not easy to follow. - Vital data missing - Lack of pagination, name on paper, etc. - Poor paragrah separation and distinction of sections	Room for Improvement - Structure of the paper is clear for the writer but not the reader. - Didn't use section headers - Paragraphs don't necessarily contain single themes.	Strong - Structure is relatively evident. - Use of appropriate section headers - Readers generally know where they are headed in the total picture.	Very Strong - Outline of paper is obvious. - Reader never questions where s/he is. - Offers an easy way to organize the content and ideas for the reader	Comments
Grammar, Punctuation & Spelling 20 %	Strong Growth Opportunities - Paper contains several grammatical, punctuation and/or spelling errors. - Repetition of same words - Verbs don't match nouns. - Pronouns don't match nouns. - More than 6 errors per page	Room for Improvement - Paper contains some grammatical, and a few punctuation and spelling errors. - Contains 4-6 errors per page	Strong - Paper contains few grammatical and a few punctuation and spelling errors. - Paper contains less than 2-3 punctation and grammatical errors per page.	Very Strong - Paper contains very few grammatical and punctuation errors. - Less than 1-2 per page	Comments
Active Verbs 10 %	Strong Growth Opportunities - Heavy use of passive verbs, pronouns, and active verbs used seemed inappropriate - Over 50% passive verbs	Room for Improvement - Frequent use of passive verbs - 30-50% passiver verbs used	Strong - Some passivity, could benefit from more active verb use - 20-30% passive verbs used	Very Strong - Most content utilizes active verbs that engage the reader and enhance what is conveyed. - under 20% passive verbs used	Comments
Intro/Closing/Graphics 10 % Does the intro engage me to read further? Does the closing summarize and convince? Are the graphics appropriate and readable?	Strong Growth Opportunities - Intro fails to engage reader or no intro - Closing is weak or non-existent - No use of graphic that was needed - Poor graphic quality that was used	Room for Improvement - Intro was present but weak. - Closing was present but weak. - No use of graphic that was needed - Graphic used was unclear	Strong - Introduction communicated the paper. - Closing summarized the paper. - Graphics used appropriately	Very Strong - Introduction clearly stated the purpose of the paper and engaged the reader to read further. - Closing provided clear summary and motivated the reader to take appropriate aciton. - Strong use of graphics where appropriate	Comments

Keywords:

Writing

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric