Forms, information for prospective student-athletes.
Evaluating a particular piece of student writing requires, in part, subjective judgment by your instructor, for very few of the writing skills stressed in freshman composition can be measured objectively. Such matters as correct spelling, which do lend themselves easily to absolute rights and wrongs, make up only a small portion of the skills one needs to communicate successfully in writing. Occasionally, then, you might find yourself troubled by the subjective nature of this evaluation and questioning whether there are widely accepted standards for good writing.
The EXPLANATION page which follows offers broad definitions of the criteria by which your instructor will likely be judging your writing. Within the five general categories, subdivided to describe a range from most to least successful skills. Very likely, early in the course, he or she will highlight one or another of these categories for your particular attention and, therefore, give less emphasis to another category in evaluating your work. As the semester progresses and you have the opportunity to practice skills in each of these areas, your writing will be judged by its success in each of the categories. Consequently, it may seem your instructor is applying tougher standards the end of the course than at the beginning. This is likely to be the case; you are expected to improve your skills.
EXPLANATION OF WRITING STANDARDS
Ideas
High The ideas in the paper are clearly related to the topic and go beyond
popular clichés. The writer shows insight and reaches logical conclusions.
Middle The ideas are clearly expressed but conventional.
Low The ideas are barely recognizable; the paper says little.
Organization
High The paper starts at a good point, has a sense of movement, gets
somewhere and then stops. It has an underlying and flexible plan that
the reader can follow. Transitions between and within paragraphs arise
from meaning.
Middle The paper exhibits some structure, but it either does not fit the content or
is overly apparent. Transitions are mechanical.
Low The paper wanders, showing little or no discernible sequence of thought.
Major points are repeated rather than developed. The paper lacks
transitions within and between paragraphs.
Relevant details/supporting evidence
High Generalizations in the paper are supported by extensive and concrete
detail. Opinions are supported by examples, facts, distinctions,
definitions and logical arguments.
Middle Too few details are included, and most are insufficiently concrete or vivid.
Opinions are only partially supported by evidence. Evidence may be
obvious or unconvincing.
Low Very few specific or concrete details appear. Opinions are asserted without
evidence.
Style
High The writer demonstrates an expressive and precise vocabulary. There is a
clear sense of audience and effective use of tone. Sentence length and
structure are varied to reflect meaning and rhetorical emphasis.
Low Limited choice or words, often misused, and unidiomatic phrasing are
typical of this paper. The student has used an inconsistent voice or a
tone inappropriate to the audience. Sentences are simple and repetitious;
logical subordination relationships are often ignored.
Mechanics
High The paper has almost no misspellings and is generally free of mechanical
errors or grammatical difficulties.errors or grammatical difficulties.
Middle Occasional misspellings, some grammatical and punctuation problems
occur in the paper.occur in the paper.
Low There are many misspellings, frequent problems with subject-verb
agreement, shifts in tense, run-ons and fragments in the paper.
For issues of intellectual honesty, please refer to the College policy on cheating/plagiarism in the current Student Handbook.