tab of NYUClasses. File names should always include the student’s name (or the team number) as well as the assignment name. You should also be sure to put your name on the document itself. Grading Rubric for All Reflection Papers Area 0 1 Passable 2 Good 3 Excellent Synopsis No synopsis Partially Good Concise, of argument accurate or synopsis of clear (s) incomplete argument(s) synopsis of synopsis of argument(s) argument (s) Critical No real Partial Good Excellent engagement engagement engagement engagement Clear, with quote, with with with systematic, reading, argument(s) argument(s) argument(s) engagement speaker’s but with clear with arguments: reasoning and sound argument. interesting, reasoning Provides banal, and evidence for counterintuitive, evidence claims confusing? (highlights about Quality of data? strengths, argument(s) How would we flaws, gaps, from know if they limits or readings; were wrong? weaknesses Evidence for in claim(s) about arguments) arguments? Discusses No clear Makes A good Makes relevance to connections some effort connection creative and broader made; like a at making made to integrated themes in stand-alone connections other connections course book report to other readings to other readings and/or readings and/or issues and/or issues issues Discusses No clear Some effort Clear Thoughtful application in application at application and professional made application; is made reflective area of your not clear application interest Writing Style Not Manageably Well-written; Beautifully written; written 1 or 2 minor No Clearly not errors. errors. proofread; multiple grammar
tab of NYUClasses. File names should always include the student’s name (or the team number) as well as the assignment name. You should also be sure to put your name on the document itself. Grading Rubric for All Reflection Papers Area 0 1 Passable 2 Good 3 Excellent Synopsis No synopsis of argument (s) Partially accurate or incomplete synopsis of argument (s) Good synopsis of argument(s) Concise, clear synopsis of argument(s) Critical engagement with quote, reading, speaker’s arguments: interesting, banal, counterintuitive, confusing? Quality of data? How would we know if they were wrong? Evidence for claim(s) about arguments? No real engagement with argument(s) Partial engagement with argument(s) but reasoning Good engagement with argument(s) with clear and sound reasoning and evidence (highlights strengths, flaws, gaps, limits or weaknesses in arguments) Excellent Clear, systematic, engagement with argument. Provides evidence for claims about argument(s) from readings; Discusses relevance to broader themes in course No clear connections made; like a stand-alone book report Makes some effort at making connections to other readings and/or issues A good connection made to other readings and/or issues Makes creative and integrated connections to other readings and/or issues Discusses application in professional area of your interest No clear application made Some effort at application; not clear Clear application is made Thoughtful and reflective application Writing Style Not Clearly not proofread; multiple grammar Manageably written Well-written; 1 or 2 minor errors. Beautifully written; No errors.
PADM-GP.2106.001.docx