EVALUATION CRITERIA
FOR COMPOSITIONS*
Language 25%
12 VERY POOR: Many errors in use and
form of the grammar presented in lesson; frequent & basic errors in
subject/verb agreement; non-Spanish sentence structure; erroneous use of
language makes the work mostly incomprehensible; no evidence of having edited
the work for language; or not enough to evaluate
16 FAIR to POOR: Some errors in the grammar presented in
lesson; some errors in subject/verb
agreement; some errors inadjective/noun agreement; erroneous use of language often impede comprehensibility; work was poorly edited for language
21 GOOD to AVERAGE: Few errors in the grammar presented in lesson;
occasional errors in subject/verb or adjective/noun agreement;
erroneous use of language does
not impede comprehensibility; some editing for language evident but not
complete
25 EXCELLENT to VERY
GOOD: No
errors in the grammar presented in lesson; very few errors in subject/verb or
adjective/noun agreement; work was well edited for language
Vocabulary 20%
8 VERY
POOR: Inadequate; very repetitive; incorrect use or non use of words
studied; literal translations; abundance of invented words; or not enough to
evaluate. Reader does not understand.
12 FAIR
to POOR: Erroneous word use or choice leads to confused
or obscured meaning; some literal translation and invented words; limited use
of words studied, repetitive. Reader has
many difficulties to understand.
16 GOOD
to AVERAGE: Adequate but not
impressive; some erroneous word usage or choice, but meaning is not confused or
obscured; some use of words studied.
20 EXCELLENT to VERY GOOD: Broad;
impressive; precise and effective word use and choice; extensive use of words
studied
Content (use of evidence and argumentation) 35 % |
23
VERY POOR: Series of separate sentences
with no transitions; disconnected ideas; no apparent order to the content; or
not enough to evaluate, very repetitive. Reader gets lost.
27 FAIR to POOR: Limited order to the content; lacks logical sequencing
of ideas; ineffective ordering; very choppy; disjointed; and repetitive.
31 GOOD to AVERAGE: An apparent order to
the content is intended; somewhat choppy; loosely organized but main points do
stand out although sequencing of ideas is not complete.
35 EXCELLENT to VERY GOOD: Logically and effectively ordered; main points and
details are connected; fluent; not choppy whatsoever.
Comments:
See reverse =>
Organization 15 %
6 VERY POOR: Minimal information; information lacks substance (is
superficial); inappropriate or irrelevant information; or not enough
information to evaluate
8 FAIR
to POOR: Limited information; ideas present but not developed; lack of
supporting detail or evidence.
10 GOOD to AVERAGE: Adequate information; some development of ideas; some
ideas lack supporting detail or evidence.
15 EXCELLENT to VERY GOOD: Very complete
information; no more can be said; thorough; relevant; on target.
Comments: See reverse =>
Mechanisms (MLA; in-text citation) 5 %
1 VERY POOR: no mastery of conventions, dominated by errors of
spelling, punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing, handwriting illegible, or
not enough to evaluate.
3 FAIR to POOR: frequent errors of spelling, punctuation,
capitalization, paragraphing, poor handwriting, meaning confused but not obscured
4 GOOD to AVERAGE: occasional errors of spelling, punctuation,
capitalization, paragraphing, but meaning
is not obscure
5 EXCELLENT to VERY GOOD: demonstrates mastery of convention, few errors in
spelling, punctuation
*f. Prof. Eva Núñez, “Rubrics.” The