Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 46 views

    Analysis of An Argument

    Uploaded by

    mik3obri3n
    This document provides a rating scale for analyzing and critiquing arguments, with characteristics described for papers scoring at each level from 6 (outstanding) to 0 (unscorable). Papers earning higher scores clearly identify and insightfully analyze the argument, develop ideas cogently and logically, support their points, and demonstrate superior writing skills. Lower scoring papers are flawed in their analysis of the argument, logical development and organization of ideas, use of support, language and writing mechanics.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Analysis of An Argument

    Uploaded by

    mik3obri3n
    46 views3 pages
    This document provides a rating scale for analyzing and critiquing arguments, with characteristics described for papers scoring at each level from 6 (outstanding) to 0 (unscorable). Papers earning higher scores clearly identify and insightfully analyze the argument, develop ideas cogently and logically, support their points, and demonstrate superior writing skills. Lower scoring papers are flawed in their analysis of the argument, logical development and organization of ideas, use of support, language and writing mechanics.

    Original Description:

    GMAT AWA Scoring Ruberic

    Original Title

    Analysis of an Argument

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document provides a rating scale for analyzing and critiquing arguments, with characteristics described for papers scoring at each level from 6 (outstanding) to 0 (unscorable). Papers earning higher scores clearly identify and insightfully analyze the argument, develop ideas cogently and logically, support their points, and demonstrate superior writing skills. Lower scoring papers are flawed in their analysis of the argument, logical development and organization of ideas, use of support, language and writing mechanics.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    46 views3 pages

    Analysis of An Argument

    Uploaded by

    mik3obri3n
    This document provides a rating scale for analyzing and critiquing arguments, with characteristics described for papers scoring at each level from 6 (outstanding) to 0 (unscorable). Papers earning higher scores clearly identify and insightfully analyze the argument, develop ideas cogently and logically, support their points, and demonstrate superior writing skills. Lower scoring papers are flawed in their analysis of the argument, logical development and organization of ideas, use of support, language and writing mechanics.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    Analysis of an Argument

    Score Rating Characteristics of a Typical


    Paper with This Score
    6 Outstanding—a cogent, well- • clearly identifies and
    articulated critique of the insightfully analyzes
    argument, demonstrating important features of the
    mastery of the elements of argument
    effective writing. • develops ideas cogently,
    organizes them logically, and
    connects them smoothly with
    clear transitions
    • effectively supports the main
    points of the critique
    • demonstrates superior
    control of language, including
    diction and syntactic variety
    and the conventions of
    standard written English.
    There may be minor flaws
    5 Strong—a well-developed • clearly identifies important
    critique of the argument, features of the argument and
    demonstrating good control of analyzes them in a generally
    the elements of effective writing. thoughtful way
    • develops ideas clearly,
    organizes them logically, and
    connects them with
    appropriate transitions
    • sensibly supports the main
    points of the critique
    • demonstrates clear control of
    language, including diction
    and syntactic variety
    • demonstrates facility with the
    conventions of standard
    written English, but may
    have minor flaws
    4 Adequate—a competent critique • identifies and capably
    of the argument, demonstrating analyzes important features
    adequate control of the elements of the argument
    of effective writing. • develops and organizes
    ideas satisfactorily, but may
    not always connect them
    with transitions
    • supports the main points of
    the critique
    • demonstrates adequate
    control of language, including
    diction and syntactic variety,
    but may lack syntactic variety
    • displays control of the
    conventions of standard
    written English, but may
    have some flaws
    3 Limited—a competent but clearly • does not identify or analyze
    flawed critique of the argument, most of the important
    demonstrating some control of features of the argument,
    the elements of effective writing. although some analysis is
    present
    • is limited in the logical
    development and
    organization of ideas
    • offers support of little
    relevance and value for
    points of the critique
    • uses language imprecisely
    and/or lacks sentence variety
    • contains occasional major
    errors or frequent minor
    errors in grammar, usage,
    and mechanics
    2 Seriously flawed—a paper • fails to show an
    demonstrating serious weakness understanding of and does
    in analytical writing skills. not identify or analyze the
    main features of the
    argument
    • does not develop ideas or is
    disorganized
    • provides few, if any, relevant
    or reasonable support
    • has serious, frequent
    problems in the use of
    language and sentence
    structure
    • contains numerous errors in
    grammar, usage, or
    mechanics that interfere with
    meaning
    1 Fundamentally Deficient—a • provides little evidence of the
    paper demonstrating ability to understand and
    fundamental deficiencies in analyze the argument or to
    analytical writing skills. develop an organized
    response to it
    • has severe and persistent
    errors in language and
    sentence structure
    • contains a pervasive pattern
    of errors in grammar, usage,
    and mechanics, thus
    resulting in incoherence
    0 Unscorable • a paper that is totally illegible
    or obviously not written on
    the assigned topic

    You might also like