RUBRIC FOR SCORING THE EXPOSÉ

 

Interviews, Research, Polls, Charts, Sub-articles (20%)

 

1 X 20 = ______________

Body, Development, Organization (40%)

 

2 X 20 = ______________

Vocabulary, Mechanics (20%) (Punctuation, Spelling, Capitalization, Grammar, Typos)

1 X 20 = ______________

Effort, Improvement, Layout/Presentation (20%)

 

1 X 20 = ______________

Distinguished (or "WOW!")

(19-20)

Interviews have surpassed minimum requirement (3 experts, 3 students). Interviewees have revealed captivating stories. Statistics from surveys have been integrated in a professional and insightful way, using quotes from the interviews to support and/or refute findings. Quotes from the surveys have also been used aptly. Background research is thorough and goes far beyond basics --the reader is provided with a meaningful education of the topic. Sub-articles demonstrate professional journalistic and meaningful quality (not just filler).

Gives reader dynamic impression and profound understanding of the subject. The exposé aptly uses examples, details, quotes, statistics, and charts to make reader feel something strongly. Creative transitions have been used. Similes and metaphors may also have been used to enhance writing. Story explores deep qualities of the issue and weaves essential facts and elements into feature artfully. Breaks the mold. Outline is logical. Compelling Title.

Professional. Sophisticated. High level, active words are selected deliberately. There is no more than one mechanical error in the entire argument. Sentence structure is varied. Reads like a professional feature from the NY Times or Rolling Stone.

Evidence of substantial time; student is working at highest potential; details are thorough and factual. There are no errors in content. Student sought help in or out of class from teacher and students. Student chose a challenging topic. Revisions obvious. Layout is of professional quality. It looks like it could be, as is, inserted into a magazine or newspaper. There is a meaningful graphic on each page with a caption of explanation; interesting quotes have been highlighted and are compelling; and every inch has been used to its full potential.

Proficient (or "Pretty Decent") (16-18)

Interviews have met minimum requirement (3 experts, 3 students) or surpassed it. Interviewees have revealed stories that capture the reader's interest for the most part. Statistics from surveys have been integrated to illustrate the topic more clearly. Quotes from the interviews and surveys have been used to support and/or refute findings from polls and research. Background research fulfills the need to know --the reader is provided with a solid education of the topic. Sub-articles demonstrate solid journalistic and meaningful quality (not just filler).

Gives reader vivid impression and deep understanding of the subject. The exposé strongly uses examples, details, quotes, statistics, and charts to make reader feel something strongly. Sophisticated transitions have been used. Similes and metaphors may also have been used to enhance writing. Story explores the issue thoroughly and weaves essential facts and elements into feature artfully. Good job. Outline is logical. Good Title.

Most vocabulary is sophisticated and used properly. Vocabulary is varied and correct. There are no more than 3 mechanical errors in the entire paper. Paper is vivid with some revisions it could be found in Newsday or Daily News or solid magazine.

Evidence of time. Student is working near highest potential; some improvement; polished presentation. Student sought help in or out of class. Revisions made. Layout is good. It looks like it could be, with some fine-tuning, inserted into a magazine or newspaper. There is a meaningful graphic on each page with a caption of explanation; interesting quotes have been highlighted to catch reader's interest; and every inch has been used to its full potential.

Satisfactory (or "Fair")

(14-15)

Interviews have barely met minimum requirement (3 experts, 3 students) and are minimal in content. Interviewees may not have revealed stories that capture the reader's interest or help make an impact on the story. Statistics from surveys have been included, but in a basic manner. For the most part, quotes from the interviews and surveys have been used to support and/or refute findings from polls and research. Background provides the bare minimal --the reader may only be provided with a very basic education of the topic (or nothing too new). Sub-articles are included but may done in a simple manner, appearing to be just filler.

Story is revealed (minimum requirements met), but it may be done in a predictable and/or awkward way with little or no examples, details, quotes, statistics, and charts to make reader feel something strongly. Little or no similes/metaphors have been used to add life to the language; may contain awkward or lacking transitions. Story may not be very compelling. Outline could have been thought through more thoroughly. Basic Title.

Language is basic solid in some areas, weak in others. Author may use simple words and take few risks. Vocabulary is somewhat dull and/or repetitive and/or used incorrectly. Story is legible but may contain multiple errors. Needs more life!

Adequate amount of time is evident though more attention should probably have been given. Neat presentation. Layout is basic. It looks like it could be, with a lot of re-working, inserted into a magazine or newspaper. There is a graphic on each page, but a caption of explanation may be missing; quotes have been enlarged, but attributions may be missing, or the reason they are highlighted seems illogical. There is still a lot of white space, and more could have been done to remove it.

Unsatisfactory (or "Needs A Lot of Work")

(0-13)

Interviews (3 experts, 3 students) and/or surveys statistics/quotes and/or research are either too short, missing, or confusing. Topic sentences are missing or confusing. The reader has not really learned anything from the exposé. Sub-articles missing, confusing, or inappropriate.

Uses sweeping generalizations with little or no supporting examples, details, quotes, statistics, and charts to make reader feel something of any meaning; missing or confusing transitions; little or no attempt to use similes/metaphors; information is unfocused or confusing; paragraphs too long, too short, or indented. Outline ignored or not used. Inappropriate or missing title.

Misuses basic vocabulary. Ignores basic rules of mechanics (capitalization, sentence structure, spelling, etc.). Story reads at a low-level. Difficult to read because of a number of distracting errors.

Time was not used productively; little or no time or care; no attention paid to basics; gross errors; sloppy; little or no revision evident. This paper is not up to par with high school writing. The layout is very poor, with a lot of white space, and no attention paid to presentation.