GRADING CRITERIA BASED UPON NINE POINT ADVANCED PLACEMENT (AP) SCALE (ENGLISH/KNIGHT)

Literary analysis essays are evaluated on how well the student addresses the topic and the prompt, the quality of ideas
and interpretation of the literature, the development of ideas, the “connectedness” of ideas, the use of language and
syntax, the quality of examples chosen from the text, the ability of the student to “stay on track” and relate ideas back
to the main idea, general organization of ideas, and usage and mechanics.

The scale used is the Advanced Placement scale. The point range is 1-9. Here are scoring charts for 200, 100, and 50
point assignments:

9 = 200 9 = 100 9 = 50
8 = 190 8 = 93 SCORING ADJUSTMENT POLICY*
8 = 45
7 = 177 7 = 88 7 = 43
6 = 170 6 = 83 When a ‘+’ is added to a scale grade it adds two points to the realized grade.
6 = 40
5 = 157 5 = 78 5 = 38 When a ‘-’ is added to a scale grade it subtracts one point.
4 = 150 4 = 73 4 = 35
3 = 137 For example: A score of ‘7+’ = 90; however, a score of ‘7-’ = 87.
3 = 68 3 = 33
2 = 130 2 = 63 2 = 30 *Note: scoring adjustments will be made only when applicable.
1 = 117 1 = 55 1 = 27

SCORING DESCRIPTIONS

9 = A perfect or nearly perfect paper; extremely well written; organization flawless; insight into the topic is on a very
mature level; ideas clearly and fully developed; writer is “close” to the subject and produces in depth discussion; use of
language and vocabulary is on a high level but comfortable, not stilted or stiff; examples from text are well chosen and
relevant; connections to focus are well explained; there is an eloquence in the writer's voice and style; mechanics are
nearly flawless.

8 = A very well written paper; all areas described in the “9” description are expected, except that the ideas will not be
quite as well developed, the writer will not be quite as comfortably involved with the subject or have as eloquent a
voice, or the mechanics may not be as flawless.

7 = A well written paper; the organization will be correct and insight into the topic will be above average; ideas will be
well developed but will lack depth needed to constitute an “A” paper; use of language will also be above average and
will also reflect a “comfort” of the writer with the subject; examples from the text will be well chosen, but there may be
a need for more elaboration on the relevance of those examples; connections to the focus are there but also may need
further discussion; mechanics are above average.

6 = A paper that follows the organizational format correctly; has average insight into the topic; uses fairly relevant
examples from the text but perhaps needs to use more of the passage from which the example was taken; uses some
elaboration on the examples and their connections to the focus; lacks depth and detail in discussion of ideas; has
average mechanics.

5 = A paper that may follow the organizational format correctly but may have lapses; has minimal insight into the topic;
uses examples minimally; usually lacks quality examples that are relevant to the subject; uses minimal elaboration
throughout essay and has no depth or detail in discussion of ideas; has average mechanics.

4 = A paper that is lacking in all areas, but still manages to follow the basics of the format; has average mechanics.

1-3 = These scores reflect writing that is so far from what it should be that the writer needs to start over; or, the writing
is average and the mechanics are significantly poor, or, the writer wrote on the wrong topic.
 SCORING RUBRIC
CONTENT [C]
CONTENT [C]: logical
connection between
examples, main idea, and
supporting detail ideas
CONTENT [C]: use of clear,
vivid examples
CONTENT [C]: clear
articulation of views
STYLE [S]
STYLE [S]: usage,
punctuation, and spelling
STYLE [S]: mechanics,
sentence structure, and
sentence variety
FORMAT [F]
FORMAT [F]: typesetting and
literary analysis paper format
ORGANIZATION [O]
ORGANIZATION [O]:
evidence of organization
STRONG
9,8,7
STRONG
student has presented
commentary that has made a
strong, specific, logical
connection between the
examples and the main idea
student has made no errors in
their use of clear, vivid
examples
student has presented
commentary with a clear
articulation of their views
STRONG
student has made no errors in
their use of usage of
grammatical conventions
(contractions, personal
pronouns, spelling)
student has made no errors in
their use of mechanics
(sentence structure or
sentence variety)
STRONG
student has presented a paper
that clearly shows the
execution and understanding
of the literary analysis paper by
including all discussed parts
(thesis, topic sentences,
concrete details, commentary,
elaboration sentences,
concluding sentences)
STRONG
student has presented a paper
that has a clear beginning,
middle, and end, possesses a
nice fluidity and includes clear
evidence of organization such
as transitions, transitional
expressions, conjunctions, etc.
MODERATE
6,5,4
MODERATE
student has presented
commentary that has made a
general connection between
the examples and the main
idea
student has used very little
clear, vivid examples
student has presented
commentary that has vaguely
articulated their views
MODERATE
student has some errors in
their use of usage of
grammatical conventions
(contractions, personal
pronouns, spelling)
student has some errors in
their use of mechanics
(sentence structure or
sentence variety)
MODERATE
student has presented a
paper that shows only a
superficial understanding of
the literary analysis paper by
including all discussed parts
(thesis, topic sentences,
concrete details, commentary,
elaboration sentences,
concluding sentences)
MODERATE
student has presented a
paper that has somewhat of a
beginning, middle, and end,
possesses traces of fluidity
and includes little evidence of
organization such as
transitions, transitional
expressions, conjunctions, etc.
WEAK
3,2,1
WEAK
student has presented no
commentary that has made a
strong, logical connection
between the examples and the
main idea
student has used no clear, vivid
examples
student has presented
commentary that has not clearly
articulated their views
WEAK
student has made significant
mistakes in their use of usage of
grammatical conventions
(contractions, personal
pronouns, spelling)
student has made significant
mistakes in their use of
mechanics (sentence structure
or sentence variety)
WEAK
student has presented a paper
that shows no understanding of
the literary analysis paper,
including all discussed parts
(thesis, topic sentences,
concrete details, commentary,
elaboration sentences,
concluding sentences)
WEAK
student has presented a paper
that has no clear beginning,
middle, and end, possesses
absolutely no fluidity and does
not include clear evidence of
organization such as transitions,
transitional expressions,
conjunctions, etc.
5.31.11/Knight