| Understanding |
Reveals little understanding of the assigned artifact. |
Reveals a questionable understanding of the assigned artifact and abstracts only a single significant piece of information as evidence. |
Reveals a relatively clear understanding of the assigned artifact and abstracts a couple of significant pieces of information as evidence. |
Reveals a clear understanding of the assigned artifact and abstracts 3-5 significant pieces of information as evidence. |
| Quality |
Off-topic and does not provide significant evidence of reflective process. |
Does not show evidence of reflection about the assigned artifact and its application to other course content; writing rarely reveals attempts at deeper levels of thinking. |
Shows some evidence of reflection about the assigned artifact and its application to other course content; writing usually reveals attempts at deeper levels of thinking. |
Reveals clear and consistent evidence of reflection about the assigned artifact and its application to other course content; writing reveals attempts at deeper levels of thinking. |
| Quantity |
Significantly below the minimum word limit. |
Somewhat below the minimum word limit. |
Meets the minimum word limit. |
Exceeds the minimum word limit. |
| Mechanics |
Writing style is in need of improvement; contains a significant number of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or word choice. |
Parts are relatively well written, but other parts reveal errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or word choice; clearly not carefully proofread prior to submission. |
Generally well written, mostly incorporating accurate grammatical structure, spelling, punctuation, and word choice; proof artifact prior to submission could have caught the remaining errors. |
Extremely well written, consistently incorporating accurate grammatical structure, spelling, punctuation, and word choice; clearly proofread and edited prior to submission. |