PARAMETERS OF EVALUATION

EXEMPLARY

SATISFACTORY

DEFICIENT

UNDERSTANDING AND INTERPRETATION

• Excellent understanding of language and reasoning.
• Precise interpretation of text and accurate rendering of content.
• Apprehends entirely context and rationale of ideas.

• General understanding of terminology and reasoning.
• Roughly renders content and meaning of text.
• Partially grasps context and intellectual motivation.

• Inadequate understanding of terminology and reasoning.
• Misinterprets ideas and assertions.
• Lacks any apprehension of context and motivation.

ANALYSIS AND ARGUMENTATION

• Thorough articulation of arguments.
• Logic of assertions fully clarified.
• Well argued critical points.

• Main lines of arguments indicated.
• An intuitive grasp of logical patterns demonstrated.
• Certain critical argumentation attempted.

• No analysis of argumentation offered.
• No awareness of logical relations and structure.
• No argumentation attempted.

CLAIM SUPPORT AND USE OF SOURCES

• Relevant facts/examples used.
• Various sources consulted and appraised.
• Adequate applications identified and proper conclusions drawn.

• Insufficient factual basis established.
• Limited sources consulted .
• Conclusions undeveloped or suggested by association.

• No use of sources.
• Sheer statements of agreement or disagreement. Guesswork w/out support.
• Superficial or irrelevant conclusions or no conclusions at all.

STYLE AND CORRECTNESS

• Penetrating insights and interesting observations.
• Outstanding articulation and autonomous conceptualization of issues.
• Clear and thoughtful exposition – sophisticated style.

• Scattered comments and remarks .
• Excessive dependency on original wording (direct quotes and paraphrasing).
• “Normal” flat style and exposition.

• Disorganized and shallow presentation.
• No conceptualization, no use of theoretical tools.
• Broken colloquial style – statements loosely connected.