Identification Questions (3 terms, 5 points each=15 points)
|5||Response provides an unambiguous, precise definition of the term, using relevant examples where necessary for clarity’s sake. Response provides a clear description of the term’s significance, with reference to other course terms or concepts if necessary.|
|4||Response provides a (basically) accurate definition of the term and description of the term’s significance, but is either not entirely precise and/or lacks relevant examples.|
|3||Response indicates an understanding of the term and its significance, but makes one or more major errors or omissions, and/or is vague or lacking in detail or examples.|
|2 or 1||Response makes an effort to define or contextualize term, but lacks any clarity or is markedly off-base.|
|0||Response makes no real effort to define or contextualize term, or response is completely incorrect (perhaps confusing the term with another).|
Short Answer (1 of 2 prompts, 20 points)
|20||Answer responds to all parts of the question. Answer is accurate and specific, with references to readings, podcasts, and films where appropriate and necessary. Answer is clearly and cogently written, and organized in a logical manner.|
|17||Answer responds to most parts of the question. Answer is generally accurate and specific and references most relevant readings, films, and podcasts where appropriate and necessary, but lacks the some important detail and/or depth. Answer is generally clear and mostly convincing, but neglects some important point, is logically unclear at a crucial spot in the argument, or is not entirely well-organized.|
|15||Answer contains at least 1 (one) major fault: Fails to respond to some important part of the question; fails to reference the most obvious/relevant reading, podcast, or film and/or substantially misinterprets its meaning or significance; Answer lacks logical coherence or is disorganized enough to make it difficult to follow.|
|12||Answer contains at least 2 (two) major faults: Fails to respond to some important part of the question; fails to reference the most obvious/relevant reading, podcast, or film and/or substantially misinterprets its meaning or significance; Answer lacks logical coherence or is disorganized enough to make it difficult to follow.|
|7||Answer contains 3 (three) major faults: Fails to respond to some important part of the question; fails to reference the most obvious/relevant reading, podcast, or film and/or substantially misinterprets its meaning or significance; Answer lacks logical coherence or is disorganized enough to make it difficult to follow.|
|0||No attempt at answering the question asked.|
Exam Question (40 points)
|Content (Multiply score by 4, 20 points possible)||Organization (Multiply score by 2, 10 points possible)||Effective Writing (Multiply score by 2, 10 points possible)|
|5||Shows mastery of course material (lecture and readings); uses appropriate evidence and specific examples at each point in the argument where they are required; information consistently accurate and complete; timing and sequence are expressed precisely and correctly throughout essay.(20-17 points)||Focused, logical approach throughout, with a clear introduction that states thesis and frames full response to question, body paragraphs in order implied by question, and conclusion that follows from discussion and clarifies it; transitions make structure clear; sound paragraph construction; complete response; no digressions.(10-9 points)||Communicates effectively throughout the paper with few lapses in grammatical convention; uses terminology as taught in class correctly; chooses appropriate words and expressions to convey meaning.
|4||Solid command of course materials, especially lectures (less so readings); answer makes use of examples, but they sometimes lack detail; few unsupported statements; most evidence correctly situated in time and order.(16-13 points)||Generally clear structure, with a defined introduction, body, and conclusion; structure and order generally corresponds to what the question requires; most paragraphs well constructed; responds to most parts of assignment or question; usually on point.(8-7 points)||Communicates clearly; may contain occasional grammatical errors, but the text is easily comprehensible; course terminology generally used correctly but sometimes not employed where appropriate; occasional vague or imprecise language.
|3||Command of lecture material, but limited (if any) reference to readings; all major points are covered, but only some are supported by evidence and examples; examples are often vague or general (lacking in specifics); some confusion about timing or order.(12-9 points)||Structure of essay is somewhat vague—there may be an introduction and conclusion, but they are not necessarily clearly linked to the organization and content of the body; some important parts of the question may be incompletely answered; important material may be present but not presented in the most logical order; usually on point.(6-5 points)||Communicates somewhat clearly, but meaning is occasionally obscured by incorrect or imprecise use of course terminology; concepts are generally communicated, but course terminology is often not used when appropriate; some grammatical errors may occasionally make meanings difficult to discern.
|2||Limited command of course material, often vague and/or superficial; much relevant evidence presented in lectures & readings is missing; points often not supported by evidence or examples; the evidence and examples used may fail to support a point; occasional inaccuracies and factual errors.(8-5 points)||Standard essay structure is unclear–opening fails to get to point of question or state thesis, no conclusion or one poorly connected to what preceded it; few transitions between paragraphs and sentences; many poor paragraphs (disjointed or rambling); fails to answer significant part of question; shows inconsistent grasp of whether a point is relevant.(4-3 points)||Meaning is generally clear to an informed reader, but poor writing sometimes impedes comprehension or proves distracting; frequent misuse of course terminology; language is often too vague, imprecise, or casual.
|1||Little or no evidence from course materials used to support statements; evidence is inconsistent; extremely vague, inaccurate use of course material.(4-0 points)||Basic structure is non-existent; no thesis or point stated at outset; no transitions; no paragraph breaks or paragraphs are random sentences; very incomplete, doesn’t answer several parts of question; uses much unnecessary or irrelevant material.(2-0 points)||Verges on unintelligible because sentences and paragraphs rarely adhere to writing conventions; little or no use of course terminology.