WR-Assignment 2: Marking Rubric

Scoring Categories and Scoring Criteria for Assignment II
Focus Interpretation of Sources (8 marks) Defence of Position (8 marks Communication (4 marks)
When marking Interpretation of Sources, the marker will consider the:
  • quality of interpretation
  • quality of evidence from sources
  • quality of evidence from knowledge of social studies
  • understanding of the assigned task
 When marking Defence of Position, the marker will consider the:
  • quality of argument(s) selected to support the position taken
  • quality of evidence selected to support the position taken
  • understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task
 When marking Communication, the marker will consider the:
  • organization/coherence
  • contribution of stylistic choices to the creation of voice (e.g., sentence variety, word choice)
  • vocabulary (e.g., specificity, accuracy)
  • sentence construction (e.g., clarity, completeness)
  • grammar and mechanics (e.g., consistency of tense, punctuation, spelling, capitalization)

Proportion of error to the length and complexity of the response must be applied when awarding a mark for Communication.
Excellent

E

 Interpretations are insightful, comprehensive, and address all sources. Evidence is specific and accurate and errors, if present, do not detract from the response. The student demonstrates a thorough and perceptive understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
8
The defence of position is based on one or more convincing, logical arguments. Evidence is specific and accurate and errors, if present, do not detract from the response. The student demonstrates a thorough and perceptive understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
8
The writing is fluent and purposefully organized. Effective stylistic choices may contribute to the creation of an engaging voice. Vocabulary is precise. The writing demonstrates confident control of sentence construction, grammar, and mechanics. Errors, if present, are inconsequential.
4
Proficient

Pf

 Interpretations are specific and accurate but may not address all sources. Evidence is relevant and appropriate, but may contain some minor factual errors. The student demonstrates a clear understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
6.4
The defence of position is based on one or more sound arguments. Evidence is appropriate, but may contain some factual errors. The student demonstrates a clear understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
6.4
The writing is logical and clearly organized. Appropriate stylistic choices may contribute to the creation of a distinct voice. Vocabulary is specific. The writing frequently demonstrates effective control of sentence construction, grammar, and mechanics. Errors do not detract from communication.
3.2
Satisfactory

S

 Interpretations are valid but general and may contain minor misconceptions. Interpretations may not address all sources. Evidence is relevant, but general, may be incompletely developed, and/or contains minor errors. The student demonstrates an acceptable understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
4.8
The defence of position is based on one or more adequate arguments. Evidence is relevant, but general and/or incompletely developed. The evidence may contain errors. The student demonstrates an acceptable understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
4.8
The writing generally clear and functionally organized. Basic stylistic choices may contribute to the creation of a voice that is adequate. Vocabulary adequate. The writing demonstrates basic control of sentence construction, grammar, and mechanics. Errors do not seriously interfere with communication.
2.4
Limited

L

 Interpretations are overgeneralized and may contain substantial misconceptions. Evidence is superficial, may not always be relevant, and may contain significant errors. The student may demonstrate a confused, yet discernible, understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
3.2
The defence of position is based on oversimplified assertions and/or questionable logic. Evidence is superficial and may not always be relevant. The evidence may contain significant errors. The student demonstrates a confused, yet discernible, understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
3.2
The writing is uneven and incomplete but is discernibly organized. Awkward stylistic choices may contribute to the creation of an unconvincing and/or inappropriate voice. Vocabulary is imprecise and/or inappropriate. The writing demonstrates faltering control of sentence construction, grammar, and mechanics. Errors hinder communication.
1.6
Poor

P

 Interpretations are mistaken or irrelevant. Evidence, if present, is incomplete and/or marginally relevant and frequently contains significant errors. The student demonstrates a minimal understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
1.6
The defence of position taken is difficult to determine and/or little to or no attempt is made to defend it. Evidence, if present, is incomplete and/or marginally relevant. Significant errors in content are frequent. The student demonstrates a minimal understanding of applicable social studies knowledge and the assigned task.
1.6
The writing is unclear and disorganized. Ineffective and/or inappropriate stylistic choices may contribute to the creation of an ineffective and/or unsuitable voice. Vocabulary is ineffective and frequently incorrect. A lack of control of sentence construction, grammar, and mechanics is demonstrated. Errors impede communication.
0.8
Zero

Z

 Zero is assigned to a response that fails to meet the minimum requirements of the Poor category.