Skip to main content
iRubric: AP Argument Rubric

iRubric: AP Argument Rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
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: P396X5
By rachelvincent
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: 9-12

Powered by iRubric 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

Develop a clear argumentative claim that answers the prompt. Evidence and explanations are appropriate and convincing. Argument is extremely coherent and well-developed. Prose demonstrates a consistent ability to control a wide range of elements of effective writing but is not flawless.
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 develop a position that answers the prompt. The evidence and explanations are appropriate and sufficient. Argument is coherent and adequately developed. Writing may contain lapses in diction nor syntax but generally the prose is clear.
Less Adequate

Develop a position that answers the prompt, but the evidence or explanations used may be uneven, inconsistent, or limited. Writing may contain lapses in diction or syntax, but it usually contains the author's ideas.
Indequate

Inadequately develops a position that answers the prompt. Evidence or explanations may be inappropriate, insufficient, or less convincing. Argument may have lapses in coherence or be inadequately developed. The prose generally conveys the writers ideas but may be less consistent in controlling the elements of effective writing.
Less Inadequate

Demonstrates less success than a 4 in developing a position that addresses the prompt. The papers show less maturity in control of writing.
Little Success

Demonstrate little success in developing a position that adheres to the prompt. These papers may misunderstand the prompt, or substitute a simple task by responding to the prompt 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

Hook is highly engaging and sophisticatedly tied in to the rest of the paragraph. Quotes from the prompt are thoroughly and sophisticatedly interpreted. The central claim is well crafted, clearly stated, taking a position that addresses the prompt more eloquently than an 8 response.
Effective

Hook is engaging and/or sophisticatedly tied in to the rest of the paragraph. Quotes from the prompt are thoroughly interpreted. The central claim is well crafted, clearly stated, taking a position that addresses the prompt.
Less Effective but More Than Adequa

Hook is effective and ties in to the rest of the paragraph. Quotes from the prompt are thoroughly interpreted. The central claim clearly takes a position that addresses the prompt.
Adequate

Hook is effective but may not tie in to the rest of the paragraph. Quotes from the prompt are interpreted, but explanation may be awkward or unclear. The central claim adequately develops a position that addresses the prompt.
Less Adequate

Hook is somewhat effective. Includes a limited explanation of the quote. Prompt is understood. The central claim takes a position but is slightly off topic, awkwardly constructed, or unclear.
Indequate

Hook is awkward or vague. Background info and/or explanation of the quote is not correct or underdeveloped. Inadequately deveopls a position that answers the prompt.
Less Inadequate

Weak hook. Explanation of the quote missing. An attempt to address the prompt is made but it is clearly misunderstood. Central claim is unclear or weakly constructed.
Little Success

No hook or no explanation of the given quote. Background info is missing when needed. The prompt is completely misunderstood and/or not addressed. Central claim is not clearly take a position.
Simplistic/Very weak!

No hook and no explanation of the given quote. 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 extremely sophisticated diction and syntax, moreso than an 8. No errors in grammar or usage.
Effective

Organization enhances meaning. Rich and substantive diction and syntax that enhances style and effect. Few or no errors in grammar or usage.
Less Effective but More Than Adequa

Clearly focused and skillful development of ideas. Generally uses rich, sophisticated, and/or effective diction and syntax. Limited errors in grammar or usage.
Adequate

Mostly focused. Development of ideas is effective. Attempts sophisticated diction and syntax, but consitently uses good vocabulary. Some errors in either grammar or usage.
Less Adequate

Somewhat focused. Development of ideas is somewhat effective. Some sentence variety. Acceptable vocabulay. Some errors in grammar or usage.
Indequate

Inconsistent focus. Development of ideas is somewhat ineffective. Lower level diction and/or syntax. Errors in grammar or usage 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 grammar and usage effect meaning.
Little Success

Clearly unorganized. Simple diction. Frequently uses the wrong word choice. Construction of sentences or paragraphs is illogical. Errors in grammar and usage severely impact meaning.
Simplistic/Very weak!

Errors in grammar and usage are so severe that almost no meaning is discerned. Completely illogical.
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 over 5 rhetorical strategies that contibute to the effectiveness. Tone is highly academic tone and appropriate. Skillfully asserts authority on the topic.
Effective

Effective sense of audience. Artfully incorporates at least 5 effective rhetorical strategies. Consistently conveys a highly academic tone and appropriate. Asserts authority on the topic.
Less Effective but More Than Adequa

Understands the audience. Clearly incorporates at least 4 effective rhetorical strategies. Consistently conveys an academic and respectful tone. Come accross as somewhat of an authority on the topic.
Adequate

Somewhat understands the audience. Clearly incorporates at least 3 somewhat effective rhetorical strategies. 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 at least 3 rhetorical strategies, but they may not contribute to the effectiveness of the argument. 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, but they may not contribute to the effectiveness of the argument. 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 are absent or they detract from purpose. Tone is elementary and/or inappropriate. Comes across as not caring about the topic.
Little Success

Does not use any rhetorical strategies. Tone comes across as inappropriate or rude. Does very little to address the audience.
Simplistic/Very weak!

No rhetorical devices. Comes across as rude. Does not take the audience into account at all. Comes across as unknowledgable on the topic.
Development of Argument
9 pts

Focus is on the development of the argument- the warrants, backing, evidence, and conditions of rebuttal.
Extra Effective

Evidence and explanations are astute, poignantly developed, and extremely convincing. Argument is extremely coherent and logical. Warrants, backings, and conditions of rebuttal are eloquently considered. Commentary always reinforces the central claim and eloquently refers back to the prompt throghout.
Effective

Evidence and explanations are sophisticated, well developed, and very convincing. Argument is very coherent and logical. Warrants, backings, and conditions of rebuttal are sophisticatedly considered. Commentary always reinforces the central claim and eloquently refers back to the prompt throghout.
Less Effective but More Than Adequa

Evidence and explanations are sophisticated, adequately developed, and convincing. Argument is coherent and logical. Warrants, backings, and conditions of rebuttal are adequately considered. Commentary sufficiently reinforces the central claim and adequately refers back to the prompt throghout.
Adequate

Evidence and explanations are appropriate and sufficiently developed. Argument is coherent and logical. Does not include warrants when needed. Commentary sufficiently reinforces the central claim and occasionally refers back to the prompt.
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 not addressed when necessary. Commentary does little to reinforce the central claim and/or does not refers back to the prompt.
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. Commentary is explanatory and not argumentative and/or never refers to the prompt.
Less Inadequate

Argument is not developed. Reasons are illogical. Little or no evidence. Does not stay on topic in relation to the central claim. Warrants are wrong or missing when needed. Commentary is explanatory and not argumentative, or ectremely limited. CM never refers to the prompt.
Little Success

Argument is not developed. Claim is not supported. Evidence is irrelevant or missing. No warrants or backing. Little to no CM and CM never refers back to the prompt.
Simplistic/Very weak!

Reads more like a report than an argument. There is no effort to support the central claim.
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, reinforcing the claim and prompt. 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, reinforcing the claim and prompt. 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. Clearly ties back to claim and prompt. 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 claim and prompt. 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, tie back to prompt and claim 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 claim and prompt . Ineffective attempt to appeal to audience in any fashion.
Less Inadequate

Summary of the arguments is unclear. Conclusion is awkwardly organized. Tie back to claim and prompt is awkward or unclear. Too wordy. Off topic.
Little Success

No summary of arguments. Tie back to claim and prompt is not clear. Does not wrap the essay up.
Simplistic/Very weak!

Simple restatement of claim. No summary of arguments.




Subjects:

Types:

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.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n16