As I read your recent paragraphs on Acts 1 and 2, I asked myself these questions: How well does this person understand the basic terms in the exercise–e.g., the term “conscience”? How clearly does the paragraph express a main idea in its response? How convincingly does the writer choose and explain lines form the play that illustrate the main idea? How well does the writer maintain clear focus on the development of this main idea? How well does the writer convey an understanding of the basic development of the plot and the characters in the play so far?
I asked other questions, too, but these are the main ones I used to assess the paragraphs. As benchmark, I used the performance category called “Proficient,” which typically corresponds to a grade in the 80s because, as our rubrics indicate, the strengths outweigh the paragraph’s weakness. In an “Advanced” paragraph, strengths CLEARLY outweigh weaknesses. On the other side of the benchmark, the category marked “Developing” indicates that strengths and weaknesses appear in equal amounts, which warrants a score somewhere in the 70s. The “Beginning” category means the writing is farther from proficiency because its strengths are outweighed by weaknesses.
If you received below a 90 and want to revise the paragraph for a new, averaged score, show me a written plan for revision, based on any marginal notes from me and the questions expressed above in the first paragraph of this announcement. Once I approve the plan, you’re good to go. Hand me the revised paragraph, which you staple to the earlier version.
As for the Conscience Meters, the aspects I observed include, but are not limited to, the following: clarity, legibility, thoroughness, line numbers cited, alignment of meter reading and quoted passage.