Skip to main content

iRubric: AP Language Research Paper rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
AP Language Research Paper 
Rubric Code: SAAWWX
By msberka
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Assessment  
Grade Levels: 9-12

Powered by iRubric Criteria, Ideas, and Content
  10-9

1. The focus is stated clearly in the thesis and meets requirements
2. Clear, relevant, interesting/vivid, and accurate details develop and enrich the central focus.
3. The topic is sufficiently narrow and manageable.
4. The topic is suited to argumentation.
5. Ideas engage, intrigue, or inspire the reader.

(N/A)

8

1. The focus is stated clearly in the thesis and meets requirements
2. Clear, relevant, and accurate details develop the central focus.
3. The topic is sufficiently narrow and manageable.
4. The topic is suited to argumentation.
5. Ideas interest the reader.

(N/A)

7

1. The reader gets only a vague sense of the focus from the thesis.
2. Appropriate and accurate details partially developed from the central focus.
3. Topic is fairly broad but manageable.
4. Topic is not completely suited to argumentation , but writer attempts to take a position.

(N/A)

6

1. Although there is a thesis, the focus is unclear.
2. Although details are present, they are loosely related, obvious, or dull.
3. Details provide weak support for focus.
4. Topic may be too broad to argue convincingly or not suitable to argumentation at all.

(N/A)

5-0

1. The focus is unclear; may lack an identifiable thesis.
2. Special requirements have been ignored or misunderstood.
3. Details are missing, incorrect, or unclear.
4. Details repeat each other and/or seem random and not related to focus.
5. Topic is too broad and/or unsuitable for argumentation.

(N/A)

Organization

10-9

1. Each developmental paragraph addresses a specific of the topic.
2. The sequence is effective and moves the reader through the paper;the order may or may not be conventional.
3. Thoughtful and sophisticated transitions show how all ideas are connected.
4. The writing is clearly organized in a way that enhances meaning or helps to develop the central idea.
8

1. Each developmental paragraph addresses a specific of the topic.
2. The sequence is effective, although it may be slightly formulaic.
3. Adequate transitions make the paper read smoothly.
4. The writing is organized in a way that guides the reader efficiently and matches purpose.
7

1. Each developmental paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the topic.
2. Sequence is logical, but overly formulaic organization may inhibit ideas.
3. Most transitions work; some connections are missing/vague.
4. The reader does not struggle to understand/make her own connections to the focus.
6

1. Each developmental paragraph attempts to address a specific aspect of the topic.
2. Some parts of the sequence are logical, but others seem random, lack purpose.
3. Transitions are limited.
4. The reader sometimes struggles to understand/make own connections to focus.
5-0

1. Developmental paragraphs are unfocused and may be confusing.
2. Sequence seems random, lacks purpose.
3. Transitions are either not used or used ineffectively.
4. The reader often struggles to understand/make own connections to focus.
Diction

10-9

1. Lively, powerful verbs provide energy. (Be verbs are limited.)
2. Specific nouns add color and clarity.
3. Modifiers effectively provide strong imagery.
4. Expression is fresh and appealing; original or unusual phrasing adds to meaning. Figurative language is effective.
5. Vocabulary is not only mature and precise but sometimes striking.
6. Vocabulary is not overdone or inflated.
7. Diction is concise, avoiding nominalizations, redundancy, etc.
8

1. Some powerful verbs, specific nouns, and descriptive modifiers enhance meaning.
2. Expression attempts to be fresh and appealing. Some original or unusual phrasing adds to the meaning. Figurative language, if used, is generally effective.
3. Vocabulary is mature, but, at times, overdone and/or imprecise.
4. Diction is usually concise, but shows some evidence of nominalizations, redundancy, etc.
7

1. Words are reasonably accurate and convey the intended message in a general manner.
2. Some verbs provide energy, and some simply link one point to another.
3. Some nouns are specific; other nouns are fairly general.
4. Expression is limited; Figurative language, if used, may be cliche or otherwise non-effective. Vocabulary is age-appropriate, but tends to be pedestrian, or attempts to be uncommon and leads to confusion.
6

1. Words are usually age-appropriate
2. Word choice often inhibits understanding due to diction that is inaccurate, too vague, or, in an attempt to be striking, becomes distracting , or confusing.
3. Expression is limited. Figurative language is not
used is consistently cliche.
4. Diction may often be excessively wordy.
5-0

1. Word choice severely limits the clarity of the intended message.
2. Verbs, nouns, and/or modifiers lack the ability to convey an image.
3. No figurative language is used.
Syntax

10-9

1. Sentences are effectively varied in length and structure; sentences effectively use structures such as cumulative (loose), periodic, etc.; non conventional structures (like fragments) are used effectively.
2. Sentences use purposeful, varied beginnings.
3. Syntax helps convey meaning through purposeful and effective use of rhetorical device such as rhetorical questions , anaphora, antithesis, etc.
4. Writing has cadence.
8

1. Sentences are effectively varied in length and structure.
2. Sentences used varied beginnings.
3. Sentences sometimes use rhetorical devices such as anaphora, antithesis, rhetorical questions, etc.
4. Some parts of the writing have cadence; one or two spots are choppy or tortuous.
7

1. Sentences are generally constructed correctly but are routine.
2. Sentences are not all alike; there is some variety in length, structure and beginnings but not enough to demonstrate author's craft.
3. Writer attempts to use a few rhetorical devices, but these do not achieve their purpose.
4. While the writing does not really have cadence, it would be easy enough to read aloud; two or three spots are choppy or tortuous.
6

1. Sentences are sometimes incorrectly constructed (run-ons, fragments, not parallel, etc.) leading to confusion.
2. Sentences are not all alike; there is some variety in length, structure, and beginnings,although not enough to demonstrate author's craft.
3. No apparent attempt to use rhetorical devices is evident.
4. Sentences are too often choppy or tortuous; reading the text aloud would present difficulties.
5-0

1. Sentences are often incorrectly constructed, leading to confusion.
2. Sentence length, structure, and beginnings are virtually identical OR apparently completely random.
3. No apparent attempt to use rhetorical devices is evident.
4. Sentences are excessively choppy or tortuous; it would extremely difficult to read the text aloud.
Voice

10-9

1. The personality of the writer is evident in the writing; the writer is confident.
2. The writer's enthusiasm and/or interest brings the topic to life.
3. The tone is appropriate and consistently controlled.
4. The overall effect is individualistic, expressive, and engaging.
8

1. A commitment to the topic is obvious.
2. The writer connects to the audience and clearly indicates a purpose for the writing.
3. The tone is sincere, pleasant, and generally appropriate.
4. The overall effect competent and pleasant.
7

1. Commitment to the topic seems to vary throughout.
2. The writer attempts to connect to the audience;
purpose is clear.
3. The tone is generally appropriate.
4. The overall effect is businesslike or neutral.
6

1. Commitment to the topic is limited.
2. Connection to the audience and purpose for the writing are unclear.
3. The tone is generally flat.
4. The overall effect is "I'm doing this only for the grade."
5-0

1. The writing lacks commitment to the topic.
2. Connection to the audience and purpose for the writing are unclear.
3. The tone is flat or inappropriate.
4. The overall tone is disengaged, bored, or even insincere.
Conventions

10-9

1.A strong grasp of standard writing conventions is apparent: capitalization is accurate; punctuation is smooth and enhances meaning; spelling correct even on more difficult words; grammar is essentially correct; usage is correct; paragraphing enhances the organization.
2. Specialized conventions (title,subtitles, in-text notes, works cited) are used accurately and enhance the text.
8

1.A good grasp of standard writing conventions is apparent: capitalization is accurate; punctuation is smooth and enhances meaning; spelling is correct on most words; grammar is essentially correct; usage is correct; paragraphing works with the organization of the paper.
2. Specialized conventions (title,subtitles, in-text notes, works cited) generally enhance the text.
7

1. Meets the criteria for 8, but errors are more numerous.
6

1. A basic grasp of standard writing conventions is apparent. Errors in conventions may impair readability.
2.Specialized conventions (title,subtitles, in-text notes, works cited) are disruptive or confusing.
5-0

1. A minimal grasp of standard writing conventions is apparent. Numerous errors in conventions distract and/or confuse the reader.
2.Specialized conventions (title,subtitles, in-text notes, works cited) are disruptive or confusing.
Introduction or Conclusion

10-9

1. Introduction, including title, is powerful and insightful and presents the thesis in a compelling way.
2. The conclusion is fully developed and leads to a powerful abstraction (insight), bringing closure to the piece.
8

1. Introduction, including title, is interesting, meaningful and presents the thesis clearly.
2. The conclusion brings the essay to a close in a memorable way but does not necessarily bring insight.
7

1.Introduction, including title, is adequate and presents thesis in a general way.
2. Conclusion simply repeats the ideas in the introduction.
6

1.Introduction, including title, is adequate for one or more of the following reasons: lacks attempt at attention-getter; no logical progression of ideas; too long or too short sentences; thesis unclear.
5-0

1. Introduction is empty of meaning.
2. Thesis may not be evident.
3. The conclusion is empty of meaning.
Support (Logical Appeal)

10-9

1. Support is detailed, specific, correct, and embedded.
2. Level of support is consistent throughout.
3. TIED is clear and used accurately and effectively in every developmental paragraph.
4. Writer balances quotes, summaries, and paraphrases from research.
5. Logical fallacies are avoided.
8

1. Support is detailed, specific, correct, and embedded.
2. Most claims are supported; one or two may need more.
3. TIED is clear and used accurately and effectively in most developmental paragraphs.
4. Writer balances quotes, summaries, and paraphrases from research.
5. Logical fallacies are avoided.
7

1. Support is sometimes detailed, sometimes specific, sometimes awkwardly embedded.
2. Several claims may need more or better support.
3. Some claims may lack adequate explanation.
4. Writer may rely heavily one one type of support--most notably quotations--demonstrating less success in synthesizing sources.
5. Writer may commit one or two logical fallacies.
6

1. Support lacks detail and specificity; support is often awkwardly embedded.
2. Some quoted passages are too long and then not developed (TIED weak).
3. Writer may rely so much on quotes that he or she comes dangerously close to plagiarism, OR writer may rely too much on paraphrase and paper does not seem to be researched based.
4. Writer may commit several logical fallacies.
5-0

1. There is little or not support
2. The writer rambles and doesn't follow TIED.
3. Writer may rely so much on quotes that he or she comes dangerously close to plagiarism, OR writer may rely too much on paraphrase and paper does not seem to be researched based.
4. Many logical fallacies OR a fallacy may be imbedded in the thesis of the paper.
Persuasiveness

10-9

1. Writer establishes a strong ethical appeal through demonstration of thorough research--including choosing and clearly introducing reliable source--and fair treatment of differing points of view.
2. Writer establishes strong emotional appeal through purposeful manipulation of language (rhetorical devices).
3. Essay reveals sophisticated understanding of the issue, acknowledging complexities, ambiguities, and/or contradictions
4. Writer takes a clear consistent stand on the is
8

1. Writer establishes ethical appeal through demonstration of thorough research--including choosing and clearly introducing reliable source--and fair treatment of differing points of view.
2. Writer establishes emotional appeal through purposeful manipulation of language (rhetorical devices).
3. Essay reveals thorough understanding of the issue,
4. Writer takes a clear stand on the issue with only one or two inconsistencies.
7

1. Writer establishes some ethical appeal through demonstration of adequate research--including usually choosing reliable sources--and recognition of differing points of view.
2. Writer attempts to establish emotional appeal through us of language (rhetorical devices) but is inconsistent or not always effective.
3. Essay reveals adequate understanding of the topic.
4. Writer takes an initial stand on the issue but may lose focus in the body of the essay.
6

1. Writer establishes limited ethical appeal; more research, more more reliable sources, or more attention to differing points of view are needed.
2. Writer establishes limited or no emotional appeal because of lack of attention to language (rhetorical devices).
3. Essay reveals limited understanding of the issue.
4. Writer's stand on the issue is unclear or inconsistent.
5-0

1. Essay lacks ethical appeal due to significant problems with research or oversight of differing points of view.
2. No apparent attempt was made to engage the reader's emotions.
3. Essay reveals misunderstanding of the issue(s).
4. Writer takes no stand on the issue.
Documentation and MLA Format

10-9

1.All internal documentation is correct.
2. NO errors in MLA format, including Works Cited page.
8

1. Internal documentation has some minor errors in placement, punctuation, or capitalization.
2. A few minor errors in format (i.e. punctuation errors)
7
6
5-0

1. Internal documentation has significant errors in format, usage, etc.
2. Many or significant errors in MLA format.




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.

n243