Skip to main content

- Username
- Password
forgot?

iRubric: They Say, I Say Investigative Essay rubric

iRubric: They Say, I Say Investigative Essay rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
They Say, I Say Investigative Essay They Say, I Say Investigative Essay Rubric Code: R223W34 By mhendersongps Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: English Type: Writing Grade Levels: 9-12

Category
	Highly Proficient High level of metacognition and sophisticated writing evidenced. (N/A)	Proficient Honors 9 Level (N/A)	Meets Basic standard Meets basic standard at a 9th grade level (N/A)	Emerging Below 9th grade level (N/A)	No Evidence (N/A)
Introductory Paragraph and Conclusi	Highly Proficient The introductory paragraph evidences high level metacognition in making choices that would hook the audience, link the attention device to the Essential Question and preview the main points of the essay.	Proficient The introductory paragraph has a strong attention device It makes clear the relevance of the attention device to the Essential Question and it previews the main points.	Meets Basic standard The introductory paragraph has an attention device, it's connection to the Essential Question is made and it previews body points at a basic 9th grade level.	Emerging The introductory paragraph is not interesting, it may be weak or rambling, and/or it is unclear how it is relevant to the topic introductory paragraph but the connection to the topic is not clear.	No Evidence There is no introductory paragraph
Essential Question	Highly Proficient The Essential Question is particularly advanced in both rhetoric and what it is exploring; yet it is concise and clearly understood by the intended audience. The rhetorical choices are noticeably strategic but not obtrusive.	Proficient The Essential Question has written with clarity in terms of mechanics and issue being focused on, however, the sophistication of strategic rhetorical or mechanical choices may not be consistently evident.	Meets Basic standard The Essential Question is general, the focus needs to be narrowed to reasonably address one issue. If Question is not narrowed, the writer's paper and speech will suffer from being overgeneralized.There may be syntax and mechanical flaws that make the focus unclear to the audience. Strategic rhetorical choices are sparse.	Emerging The Essential Question does not make clear what will be examined and/or it is far too general. The syntax and mechanics of the Essential Question make it difficult, if not impossible to follow. No strategic rhetorical choices are evidenced.	No Evidence No Essential Question. Directions were not followed.
They Say Side One Arguments	Highly Proficient At a highly mature level of understanding, the writer uses The Anatomy of an Argument format & identifies, supports (acknowledges & cites sources), and explains three arguments central to side one views. No personal bias is evidenced.	Proficient At an Honors level if understanding the writer uses the Anatomy of an Argument format & identifies, supports (source citations included) and explains three arguments central to side one views. Very little, or no personal bias detected.	Meets Basic standard At a surface level of understanding, the writer uses Anatomy of an Argument & identifies, supports, cites and explains at least two arguments central to side one views. The writer may struggle with keeping the arguments free of personal bias.	Emerging The writer is inconsistent in using Anatomy of an Argument format and in identifying three central arguments, supports, explanations & sources for Side One. Frequent personal bias shown.	No Evidence More is missing from the three arguments than what is there. Writer does not evidence a firm understanding of Anatomy of an Argument.
They Say Side Two Arguments	Highly Proficient At a highly mature level of understanding, the writer identifies, supports (acknowledges & cites sources), and explains three arguments central to side one views. No personal bias is evidenced.	Proficient At an Honors level if understanding the writer uses the Anatomy of an Argument format & identifies, supports (source citations included) and explains three arguments central to side one views. Very little, or no personal bias detected.	Meets Basic standard At a surface level of understanding, the writer uses Anatomy of an Argument & identifies, supports, cites and explains at least two arguments central to side one views. The writer may struggle with keeping the arguments free of personal bias.	Emerging The writer is inconsistent in using Anatomy of an Argument format and in identifying three central arguments, supports, explanations & sources for Side One. Frequent personal bias show	No Evidence More is missing from the three arguments than what is there. Writer does not evidence a firm understanding of Anatomy of an Argument.
I Say Arguments	Highly Proficient At a highly mature level of metacognition, the writer clearly restates and answers their Essential Question, identifies, supports (acknowledges & cites sources), and justifies their stance. The arguments are clear, fluent, logical, reveal a balance of pathos & logos and are free of logical fallacies.	Proficient At an Honors level of metacognition, the writer restates &answers their Essential Question, identifies, supports- with appropriate citations- & justifies their stance. arguments are mostly clear, may evidence some conscientious use of pathos and logos appeals and are mostly free of logical fallacies.	Meets Basic standard At a surface level of metacognition, the writer answers their Essential Question, & makes use Anatomy of an Argument to justify their stance. The writing may evidence some strategic use of logos over pathos or vice versa. The writing evidences some, but not fatal use of logical fallacies.	Emerging The writing evidences below 9th grade level usage of Anatomy of an Argument in justifying their Essential Question stance. Arguments are presented but underdeveloped. At times the stance may be confusing. Some of the arguments may not be supported and explained and/or may be irrelevant to the original Essential Question. Logical fallacies impede the arguments.	No Evidence It is unclear as to what the writer's own response to the Essential Question is. The arguments are either too few, irrelevant, or are not developed with both support and explanations.
Concluding Paragraph Summarizes key points. Restates Essential Question. Again answers question and ends on a thought-provoking, powerful note.	Highly Proficient All parts in place at a highly advanced level of metacognition and writing. Reader/listener is wanting more at the end. The overall creativity is high.	Proficient All parts in place at a level of 9th honors proficiency. The metacognition and writing is solid. The ending is solid, but could be more creative and thought-provoking.	Meets Basic standard All parts of the conclusion are evidenced but may be out of order and/or at times awkward in the wording. The ending is basic, almost too prescriptive. It is void of creativity.	Emerging There are missing parts to the conclusion. The ending leaves the reader confused. The end sentence may be abrupt. New material or arguments may have been submitted in the conclusion.	No Evidence There is no identifiable attempt at a conclusion. The essay just ends abruptly.
MLA Usage The writer masterfully signals who and what is being quoted. Quotations are accurately used to indicate the direct words and work of others. Author and source is identified either in the signal phrase or in the parenthetical documentation.	Highly Proficient Masterful, sophisticated, and strategic- above Honors level. The writing makes consistent, accurate, and nearly flawless use of of MLA in text citing of author, source, quotes, paraphrases. Credit is always given where credit is due. The	Proficient At an Honors level of learning. The writing shows that the learner is aware of what needs to be done, how it needs to be done, and makes a valiant effort at consistently and correctly using MLA, but this area is still a work in progress. It will improve as you revise.	Meets Basic standard MLA usage is at an average 9th grade level. The writer evidences that they somewhat understand the importance of identifying and giving credit to authors and sources; however, they are often inconsistent or incorrect in usage,	Emerging The writer attempts at using signal phrases, quotations and MLA; however, there are significant lapses in usage where it would be required. There are numerous instances where the direct words or ideas of others are not given credit,	No Evidence Writer makes no attempt at MLA correct usage. Writer may frequently take credit for words/ideas that are clearly not their own. Writer may cite website addresses for documentation, despite being told they are not acceptable in academic writing.
Transitions The writing seamlessly guides the reader through the essay.	Highly Proficient A variety of thoughtful transitions are used. They not only clearly show how ideas are connected, but they evidence the writer's ability to rhetorically select the precise transition words which will enhance their own ethos as well as the ethos of quoted persons and sources.	Proficient Transitions show how ideas are connected, but there is inconsistency in quality. Some transitions may be general and overused, others may be strategic and enhance the ethos of the writer.	Meets Basic standard Transitions show how ideas at a basic, surface level. The writer uses transitions but they are consistently general. The writer tends to use the same ones over and over.	Emerging Transitions are used rarely or randomly. When the writer attempts to use them, they are often awkwardly worded and/or they are misplaced. Writing evidences little awareness as to how crucial transitions are for guiding a reader/listener.	No Evidence Transitions not evidenced at all, or if attempted, have no effect on guiding the reader smoothly through the points being made.
Sentences/Syntax	Highly Proficient Sentences are complete, well constructed and at a high level of strategically varied structure and punctuation. They are correct. The rhetoric utilized in the sentence smoothly advances the writer's line of reasoning .	Proficient Sentences are complete, well constructed and shows evidence of some strategically varied structure. The sentences may have an occasional lapse in clarity and effectiveness; however, it does not impair what is being said	Meets Basic standard All sentences are complete and well constructed at a basic level . There may be some evidence of strategically varying sentence structure. The rhetoric of the sentences is at a base level. Occasional fluency flaws.	Emerging Most sentences are complete and most sentences at a basic level, primarily using simple sentences. If higher level sentences are attempted, there are often flaws in how it is punctuated, or the sentence flaws more often than not, impair the reader's understanding of what the writer is attempting to say. At times, the writer is half-hazard in using capitalization and end punctuation	No Evidence The writing has so many syntax flaws that it is extremely difficult for the reader to follow. There are many sentence fragments or run on sentences. Punctuation is often missing or incorrectly used. Frequently appropriate capitalizing is not happening.
Mechanics Spelling, punctuation, grammar, capitalization, consistent verb tense.	Highly Proficient The writing is carefully proofed for mechanical flaws. Writer makes sophisticated use of variety of thinking verbs to express point of view. There are no spelling, grammar capitilization or punctuation errors.	Proficient The writing is carefully checked. Writer makes use a variety of thinking verbs to express point of view. There are a few errors in mechanics; however, they do not detract from the content points.	Meets Basic standard The writing contains some mechanical errors that occasionally impair the reader's ability to follow the line of reasoning in the essay and/or are jarring. Most of the mechanical errors appear to be due to carelessness.	Emerging The writing evidences little to no proof reading for mechanical errors. The mechanical errors more often than not, make the content of the essay difficult to understand; they overshadow the ideas.	No Evidence The writing evidences no proof of editing. There are so many mechanical errors that it is extremely difficult for the reader to follow much, if any of what is being written.

Subjects:

English

Types:

Writing

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More English rubrics

More Writing rubrics

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

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 iRubric^tm.

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

n16