Holistic Measure (based on Holistic Rubric for Disciplinary Writing)

 Measuree Name
 Measuring Situation
Criteria  

1

Thesis  

   

2

Relevance  

   

 

 

 

 

2

Depth of
Knowledge

and

Accuracy of
Evidence

3

Clarity of
Content

and

Logical
Development

4

Analysis of Competing
Ideas and Perspectives;

Synthesis

5

Mechanics of Writing and

Effective Use
of Disciplinary Language

unclear partially articulated clear easy to understand meaningful  
 

 
 
to author only interest readers somewhat connects with the audience readers will use/reference exceptionally valuable  
 

 
 

 

 

 

 
           
           

Shows the greatest level of mastery of the discipline and use the strongest supporting evidence

Shows mastery in a specific area of the discipline and can support their ideas with strong evidence within their area of expertise

Has a foundational understanding of key concepts and can supports these concepts with expert sources

Introduces a few key ideas that connect and supports these ideas with key references

Demonstrates an understanding of the most basic concepts and supports ideas with the most obvious references

  

Discusses rich or complex ideas with great credibility and facility, expressing arguments in ways that are both logical and satisfying

Expresses new ideas to all audiences in a form that flows logically and is difficult to challenge

Articulates ideas clearly;
the premises lead to solid conclusions

Discusses the key concepts, but does not necessarily connect them clearly to a conclusion

Explains some of the concepts or ideas, employs some supporting evidence,  and shows some sense of structure by adding a conclusion

  

Clearly presents and synthesizes all competing and complementary perspectives

Analyzes competing and complementary ideas well enough to demonstrate a clear synthesis

Is proficient in identifying competing or complementary ideas within the synthesis and conclusion

Presents a few competing or complementary ideas and is able to recognize the dilemmas they present

May identify at least one idea that contradicts the thesis and synthesizes concepts to a minimal extent

  

Models the standards of discourse for the discipline in style, format, use of language, and overall writing quality

Employs the language of the discipline appropriately; the reader finds the writing style clear and credible

Clearly and accurately explains the concepts used in the discipline, and applies appropriate style, format, and quality conventions expected by the audience

Is familiar with the writing conventions of the discipline but uses jargon to attempt to gain credibility and to mask flaws in understanding

Is minimally competent in using proper mechanics of writing and uses the language of the discipline to a very limited degree