NEEDS IMPROVEMENT COMPETENT EXEMPLARY

INTRODUCTION AND THESIS STATEMENT

0 to 1.3 points Introduction presents background details as a seemingly random collection of information; may be unclear and unrelated to the topic. If stated, thesis is unclear, over-general, or insignificant. Thesis may be absent; author’s position is vague or confused.

1.4 to 1.7 points Introductory paragraph contains some background information and states the problem, but does not explain all details. Thesis is stated and is appropriately focused and has some significance. Author’s position is clearly established.

1.8 to 2 points Well developed introductory paragraph contains detailed background, a clear explanation or definition of the problem, and a very strong thesis statement. Thesis is specific, significant, and forecasts structure of supporting argument. Author’s position and possible exceptions is clearly, concisely, and confidently stated.

QUALITY OF AUTHOR’S SUPPORTING ARGUMENT(S)

0 to 4.1 points Main points in supporting argument are not sufficient. Development of ideas is minimal or absent, and the link to the thesis is weak or nonexistent. Body is too brief to develop a convincing argument; pattern of development and style is simplistic or confused. Whatever argumentation is present lacks focus and tends to wander. May commit logical fallacies and fail to recognize hidden assumptions.

4.2 to 5.3 points Main points in supporting argument are clearly made and directly related to the thesis, but one or more may lack enough detail and development. Yet, the essay is worthwhile reading. The author knows the material well enough to clearly explain it, but some insights may be missed. Patterns of development used for support and overall style may not be perfectly appropriate. All elements of correct argumentation are present, but connection to thesis may be weak. Generally free of logical fallacies and hidden assumptions.

5.4 to 6 points Main points in supporting argument are well developed and directly related to the thesis. The supporting details are concrete and so rich that the reader learns by reading the essay. The author is obviously comfortable with the material and knows enough about the subject to explain it in great detail. Support uses appropriate patterns of development and style and all arguments are strong or valid. Each aspect relates to thesis, providing coherence and continuity. Logical fallacies are absent and all assumptions acknowledged.

PHL 377: ETHICS: FINAL PAPER GRADING RUBRIC

OPPOSING/ALTERNATIVE VIEW(S) CONSIDERED AND REBUTTED

0 to 3.4 points Discussion of opposing or alternative views is absent or superficial. If alternative views are recognized, their summary, analysis, and evaluation are flawed and incomplete. Failure to detect hidden assumptions or logical fallacies. Counterargument or refutation is absent or too weak to rebut opposing view.

3.5 to 4.4 points Opposing or alternative views are recognized but points of conflict may be overstated or dismissed too hastily. Summary, analysis, and evaluation of other views mostly accurate. Rebuttal is attempted and hidden assumptions or dubious facts or sources may be recognized. If present, some logical fallacies are detected. Counterargument or refutation attempts to rebut opposing view.

4.5 to 5 points Opposing or alternative views are accurately and fairly represented. Argument(s) supporting opposing views are skillfully summarized, analyzed, and evaluated. Rebuttal challenges any hidden assumptions and questionable facts or sources. All logical fallacies are identified. Well-supported, solid counterargument or decisive refutation successfully yet respectfully rebuts opposing view.

ATTAINMENT OF COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES DEMONSTRATED

0 to 1.3 points The paper fails to clearly demonstrate that the author has fully understood and applied concepts learned in the course. Attainment of Course Learning Outcomes is only partial or completely absent.

1.4 to 1.7 points The paper demonstrates that the author, for the most part, understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Some of the Course Learning Outcomes are attained and are integrated into the exposition of the author’s position.

1.8 to 2 points The paper demonstrates that the author fully understands and has applied concepts learned in the course. Course Learning Outcomes are fully grasped and skillfully integrated into the author’s own insights.

CONCLUSION SUMMARIZES ARGUMENT(S), REITERATES THESIS AS A SOLUTION, AND RE- FOCUSES SCOPE

0 to 0.6 points Conclusion does not adequately summarize the main points and fails to identify implications and consequences, or conclusion is a simplistic summary. Conclusion may be rigid or absolute, and may be attributed to external authority. No suggestions for change or future impact of conclusion are included. Implications may include vague reference to conclusions.

0.7 to 0.8 points Conclusion summarizes main topics and considers evidence of consequences extending beyond a single issue. Presents implications that may impact other people or issues, but these may be only loosely related to consequences. Implications may include vague reference to conclusions. Some suggestions for change are evident.

0.9 to 1 points Conclusion summarizes the main topics without repeating previous sentences and identifies and insightfully discusses implications and consequences. Context, assumptions, and evidence are considered, and author’s own assertions are carefully qualified. Consequences are fully taken into account and integrated within a larger conceptual framework. Implications are developed and ambiguities recognized and considered. Author’s opinions and suggestions for change or future impact of conclusion are logical and well thought out.

PHL 377: ETHICS: FINAL PAPER GRADING RUBRIC

WRITING STYLE AND OVERALL ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING WORD COUNT

0 to 2 points In many places, language obscures meaning. Grammar, syntax, or other errors are distracting or repeated. Little evidence of proofreading. Work is unfocused and poorly organized; lacks logical connection of ideas and the writing lacks a clear sense of direction. Transitions are absent or few and forced. Position- paper format is absent or inconsistent. Word-count falls far short of the required minimum of 1800 words.

2.1 to 2.6 points In general, language does not interfere with communication. Errors are not distracting or frequent, although there may be some problems with more difficult aspects of style and voice. Basic organization is apparent and logical; transitions connect ideas, although they may be mechanical. Includes transitions that add to the essay’s coherence. Paper includes all elements of position-paper format. Word count is close to the recommended range of 1800-2300 words and not less than 1300 words.

2.7 to 3 points Language clearly and effectively communicates ideas. May at times be nuanced and eloquent. Errors are minimal or absent. Logical, compelling progression of ideas in essay; clear structure which enhances and showcases the central idea or theme. Effective, mature, graceful transitions exist throughout the essay. Skilled and persuasive use of position-paper format. Word count is very close to the recommended range of 1800- 2300 words. In cases where the word count greatly exceeds 2300 words, the content of the paper and exposition of the thesis are benefited by the additional material.

DOCUMENTATION, SOURCES, AND FORMATTING

0 to 0.6 points Few sources are cited or used correctly. Incomplete or incorrectly formatted list of sources.

0.7 to 0.8 points Sources are cited and used correctly for the most part. List of sources is complete and formatted with only minor errors.

0.9 to 1 points All sources are cited and used correctly, demonstrating understanding of ethical, economic, legal, and social issues involved with the use of the information. List of sources is complete and perfectly formatted.

OVERALL TOTAL

/20 points