Essay 2: Arguing a Position

Quality Criteria
A focused, welldefined problem
and thesis

A well-argued
position

An effective
response to
objections

No/Limited Proficiency
(1)
Problem is not
explained. Thesis is
missing. Reader cannot
determine thesis and
purpose or thesis has no
relation to the writing
task.

Minimal Proficiency (2)

Proficiency (3)

High Proficiency (4)

Problem is not welldeveloped. Thesis and

topic are somewhat
vague or only loosely
related to the writing
task.

Substantially, logically, and

concretely defined problem.
Details are germane,
original, and convincingly
interpreted.
Thesis is clear and specific.
Develops fresh insight.

Offers simplistic,
undeveloped, or cryptic
support for the position.
Inappropriate or off
topic generalizations.
Analysis is irrelevant to
thesis. There are faulty
assumptions and errors
of fact.
Fails to include a
response to readers
objections.

Offers somewhat
underdeveloped support
that may be too broad or
unfocused. Details are
too general, not
interpreted, or
inappropriately
repetitive.

Problem is competently
developed, but still has
some weaknesses, often in
terms of development,
originality, or focus. Thesis
and purpose are fairly
clear and match the
writing task.
Offers solid reasoning, but
there may still be some
areas that are
undeveloped or
unfocused. Assumptions
are not always recognized
or made explicit. Contains
mostly appropriate details
or examples.
Offers solid objections and
responses to objections.
Contains mostly
appropriate responses but
some might not be
germane or original.
Organization supports
thesis and purpose.
Transitions are mostly
appropriate. But sequence
of ideas or paragraph
structure could still be
improved.

Fully and imaginatively

supports thesis and
purpose. Sequence of ideas
is effective. Transitions,
topic sentences, and
paragraph structure are
effective.

Uses a relevant source to

support, extend, and
inform, but not substitute
writers own development
of ideas. Doesnt overuse
quotes, but may not
always conform to
required APA style.
Demonstrates proficiency
in English grammar,
vocabulary, and sentence
structure. Demonstrates a
good understanding of
APA.

Uses source (scientific data,

authoritative testimony,
statistics, etc.) to support,
extend, and inform, but not
substitute writers own
development of idea.
Doesnt overuse quotes.
Demonstrates high
proficiency in English
grammar, vocabulary, and
sentence structure. A
complete or near complete
understanding of APA.

A clear, logical
organization

Unclear organization. No
or very few transitions.
No or very few topic
sentences. Paragraphs
arent focused. Flow
between topics and
paragraphs is confusing.

Use of sources/APA
format and English
grammar and
vocabulary

Neglects important
sources. Uses 0 sources.
Possibly uses source
material without
acknowledgement. Does
not demonstrate
proficiency in English
grammar, vocabulary,
and sentence structure.
No or little
understanding of APA.

Student,
Notes
--Dr. Matt

Responses to readers
objections are
underdeveloped or
vague. Perhaps only
offers an objection but
no response to that
objection.
Some signs of logical
organization. May have
abrupt or illogical shifts
and ineffective flow or
ideas. Weak topic
sentences. Paragraph
structure could be
improved.
Uses a somewhat
relevant source.
Quotations and
paraphrases may be too
long and/or
inconsistently
referenced.
Demonstrates limited
proficiency in English
grammar, vocabulary,
and sentence structure.
Inconsistent
understanding of APA.

Develops fresh insight.

Substantial, logical, and
concrete development of
position. Details are
germane, original, and
convincingly interpreted.

Effectively anticipates and

appropriately responds to
readers' likely objections in
a detailed manner.