Grading criteria




Do not write the way you speak (clarify causal relation between sentences; choose the precise words carefully and avoid generalized verbs); avoid the passive voice, dangling pronouns and unspecified pronouns.


Describe fictional narrative only in the present simple; start with a punch-line rather than with a historical survey of the theme; check spelling (including names); pay attention to verb-noun coordination; explain quotation marks unless used for quoting.




Work out from a very short passage or scene and a limited set of questions; try to substantiate the argument with textual evidence.


Do not base your findings on personal reaction; do not assume audience reception or authors intentions; do not quote if you can paraphrase; provide plot synopsis only when it serves your argument; do not mention irrelevant details.





Provide a clear argument at the beginning and work systematically through its implications; make sure that the argument does not rely only on what has already been discussed in class or secondary material.


Aim for formulations to which your friends will react, I never thought about that!; keep the same level of innovation and motivated questioning throughout the paper.



Grading scale: style

      3.64.0: Elegant writing, flowing argument with well-structured paragraphs, topical sentences and transitions.

      2.83.5: No jarring language, clear structure. Few linguistic mistakes. A few awkward phrases.

      1.82.7: Colloquial or ungrammatical language. Little attention to structure.

      F1.7: Sloppy language with frequent grammatical errors.


Grading scale: exposition

n    3.64.0: Coherent argument throughout. Well-substantiated by specific textual evidence. Very concise argumentation with little fat in descriptions.

n    2.83.5: Coherent argument, although with some deviation to unrelated points.

n    1.82.7: Mixture of argumentation and unmotivated descriptive passages. No examples from text.

n    F1.7: Drawn, descriptive paragraphs unmotivated by any argument.


Grading scale: originality

n    3.64.0: An argument most of the other students are likely to have never thought about before, or synthesizing more than a single argument.

n    2.83.5: Solid argument, although more expected and less complex.

n    1.82.7: Description of easily-discernible textual theme or style, or recycling of argument made in class.

n    F1.7: No argument.