For reference: RUBRIC for STUDENT ESSAYS in Philosophy 2013-2014 DO NOT WRITE on this extended form. Fill out the 1-PAGE FORM for each essay assigned to you, and attach all the short forms in one (or two) emails to Dept. Chair. Refer to this handout only for what (a d) mean for each item. Do NOT fill out this sheet. On the one-page evaluation form for each essay, fill out: YOUR NAME (faculty member filling out this form), and the CODED FILE NAME of each anonymous student essay. PORTFOLIO essays: The file name will read, for example: M/E9 or E9 or S9 (where E stands for an ethics class, M/E for a metaphysics/epistemology class, S for Phil 398: Junior/Senior Seminar). Note: 1-4 embody the essentials of critical reasoning 5 concerns writing for an audience 6-8 is for research papers (if applicable) 9 concerns the history of philosophy (if applicable) 10 concerns a global perspective (if applicable) 1. Thesis statement a. Thesis is not stated clearly anywhere in the entire essay. b. Thesis is stated imprecisely and/or is not stated completely in one place. c. Thesis and main reasons are stated in a fairly clear and complete way. d. Thesis and main reasons are clearly and completely articulated in a single paragraph (abstract format).
2 2. Reasoning and organization a. The essay s overall line of argument is not apparent e.g., facts may be summarized without interpretation or evaluation, or fail to be connected to specific premises. b. The basics of the overall argument are apparent, although significant reorganization is needed e.g., facts are bunched together at the beginning instead of integrated with specific arguments; or parts of the argument are not presented in logical order. c. The overall argument is clear, although minor reorganization is needed e.g., transitions should be identified more clearly, or facts are not always connected to relevant premises. d. The premises and conclusions of each part of the extended argument are clearly identified and presented in logical order; the essay forms a coherent whole, with clear transitions, and with facts brought in as relevant to support specific premises. 3. Developed ideas a. Ideas are briefly stated or sound confused or memorized; they do not show independent analysis or connection to each other as part of an extended argument. b. Ideas are stated but should be clearer; ideas show only the beginnings of analysis and connection to each other. c. Ideas are developed fairly clearly and in some detail, with some connections made to the overall argument of the essay. d. Ideas are fully and imaginatively developed e.g., similar claims are clearly distinguished, presuppositions are examined, effective examples are offered, logical implications are explored, implications for other philosophical topics may be suggested. 4. Opposing/alternative views a. The essay is one-sided, without opposing views considered in a meaningful way. b. Some brief objections are raised, but do not address the most important points in a significant way. c. Some relevant objections and replies are stated, but could be developed in more detail and/or could address more important concerns. d. The essay is balanced, with significant opposing views sympathetically and fully expressed, and with detailed, cogent replies.
3 5. Writing mechanics (spelling, grammar, paragraphs and transitions). NOTE: do NOT include page references/endnotes/footnotes or bibliography here. a. The writing mechanics were significantly flawed in one or more areas (spelling, grammar, paragraphs and transitions), making understanding the ideas in the essay quite difficult. b. The writing mechanics (spelling, grammar, paragraphs and transitions) were flawed enough to make understanding the ideas somewhat difficult. c. The writing mechanics (spelling, grammar, paragraphs and transitions) were handled with a basic competence, so that understanding the ideas was mostly unimpeded. d. All of the writing mechanics (spelling, grammar, paragraphs and transitions) were handled extremely well, so that there was no interference with understanding the ideas presented. 6. Writing: page references/endnotes/footnotes (if applicable). a. Page references were not given when needed. b. Page references were sometimes given when needed, but not consistently so. c. Page references were consistently given when needed, but the format was incomplete or inaccurate. d. Page references were given consistently, accurately, and completely. 7. Writing: bibliography (applicable for research papers). a. Bibliographical information was given neither at the end of the essay nor in footnotes/endnotes. b. Bibliographical information was given (either at the end of the essay or in footnotes/endnotes), but the format had significant problems such as being incomplete or inaccurate (e.g., several articles from the same anthology are referred to, but only the anthology is listed). c. Bibliographical information was given (either at the end of the essay or in footnotes/endnotes) but the format had minor problems with being incomplete or inaccurate. d. Complete and accurate bibliographical information was given (either at the end of the essay or in footnotes/endnotes).
4 (write on separate answer page: a, b, c, d or N.A. if not applicable to this assignment) 8. Research (If not a research essay, then write N.A.) a. Insufficient sources were consulted, and/or sources were not philosophically sound, and/or central ideas were misinterpreted. b. Sources were basically philosophically sound, but their ideas were only partly understood or explained. c. While philosophically sound sources were read and a basic knowledge of their ideas was demonstrated, the ideas needed more careful interpretation and evaluation and/or needed to be better integrated into the essay. d. Philosophically significant sources were read; knowledge of their ideas was thoroughly demonstrated; the ideas were well interpreted, critically evaluated, and integrated into the essay. (write on separate answer page: a, b, c, d or N.A. if not applicable to this assignment) 9A. History of Philosophy Use of Primary Texts (if applicable) a. Primary historical texts were not adequately consulted or were seriously misinterpreted. b. The essay engages with some primary historical texts but not enough or engages with them in a way that is often not careful, charitable, or plausible. c. Primary historical texts were interpreted in some detail and with some care, charity, and plausibility. d. The essay engages well with primary historical texts, and the texts are interpreted carefully, charitably, and plausibly. 9B. History of Philosophy Understanding of Key Figures (if applicable) a. Relevant concepts and ideas of an important figure in the history of philosophy were omitted, or seriously misinterpreted and/or misunderstood. b. Relevant concepts and ideas from an important figure in the history of philosophy were referred to with only basic understanding and/or were partly inaccurate. c. Relevant concepts and ideas from an important figure in the history of philosophy were expressed in some detail and were mostly accurate. d. Relevant concepts and ideas from an important figure in the history of philosophy were expressed accurately and in depth, and critically evaluated. 9C. History of Philosophy Grasp of Historical Context (if applicable) a. The historical context of philosophical ideas and their contemporary relevance was omitted or seriously misunderstood. b. The essay demonstrates only a basic understanding of the historical context of philosophical ideas and their contemporary relevance, or was partly inaccurate. c. The historical context of philosophical ideas and their contemporary relevance was expressed in some detail and was mostly accurate. d. The essay demonstrates an excellent grasp of the historical context of philosophical ideas and theories and their relevance to contemporary philosophical debates and ideas.
5 (write on separate answer page: a, b, c, d or N.A. if not applicable to this assignment) 10A. Global Perspective Check any of the following that apply: i) Non-Western Philosophy: The essay attempts to significantly address philosophical worldviews or ideas of thinkers working outside of the Western tradition. ii) Meta- Issues Arising from Diversity: The essay attempts to significantly address meta-philosophical or meta-ethical issues arising from the diversity of worldviews across cultures (e.g., is ethical relativism implied by a diversity of ethical views across cultures? Can we meaningful compare or criticize worldviews or paradigms without presupposing one? ) iii) Applied Ethical Issues: the essay attempts to significantly address ethical issues that are global in nature or involve multiple cultures (e.g., the ethics of war, environmental philosophy, the ethics of globalization, world hunger) 10B. Global perspective Non-Western (if applicable): a. Relevant ideas of non-european/north American thinkers or global topics/concepts were either unclear or misinterpreted. b. Relevant ideas of non-european/north American thinkers or global topics/concepts were referred to with only basic understanding and were partly accurate. c. Relevant ideas of non-european/north American thinkers or global topics/concepts were expressed in some detail and were mostly accurate. d. Relevant ideas of non-european/north American thinkers or global topics/concepts were expressed accurately and in depth, and were critically evaluated. DO NOT WRITE on this extended form. Return 1-PAGE FORMS to Dept. Chair.