Web Project Grading

A 88- to 100-Point Web Site (3.5-4.0, A Range)

• Critical analysis has a substantive thesis that is fully explored and supported 
• Shows substantial depth, fullness and complexity of thought  
• Expresses ideas clearly and commands the reader’s attention  
• Analytical sections demonstrate clear, unified and coherent organization; as a whole, site is organized along easily discernible lines, and navigation elements function on each page  
• Critical analysis is fully developed and detailed with arguments supported by persuasive reasoning and references to text; there is an appropriate balance between providing evidence and analyzing that evidence
• Annotated passage offers a substantive close reading; annotations include a blend of the writer’s analysis, significant links, and appropriate images
• Contains all of the required sections: critical analysis, annotated passage, about this site, and annotated links and credits 
• Offers clear citation of all ideas and words not the author’s own 
• Has superlative page design:  clear text and images, skillful use of color, no clutter; all images and links serve a purpose 
• Has a sophisticated style (remarkable variety of sentence pattern, smooth transitions between ideas, superior control of diction)  
• Has few, if any, minor errors in grammar, usage or mechanics  

• Critical analysis has a clear thesis, but may not fully explore or support thesis  
• Shows some depth and complexity of thought  
• Expresses ideas clearly   
• Analytical sections demonstrate effective organization; as a whole, the site has an effective organizational scheme, but a few navigational elements may not function
• Critical analysis is well developed with sensible reasoning and references to text; however, some evidence may detract from the thesis, purpose or goals and some ideas might not be fully explored 
• Critical analysis demonstrates balance between evidence and analysis for the most part, but balance may be weak in places
• Annotated passage provides a close reading, but the writer’s analysis may be scant, the annotations may be skewed toward links and images, or a few links and images may not have a clear relationship to the text
• Contains all of the required sections: critical analysis, annotated passage, about this site, and annotated links and credits 
• Offers clear citation of all ideas and words not the author’s own 
• Has strong page design: clear text and images, effective use of color, minimal clutter; the majority of images and links work toward a purpose 
• Has an effective style (some variety of sentence patterns, transitions between ideas, accurate diction) 
• Has few errors in grammar, usage or mechanics  

• Critical analysis has a thesis that may not be entirely clear or supported  
• Critical analysis shows insufficient awareness of the complexity of the theme; may offer simplistic or repetitive analysis  
• Communicates ideas clearly for the most part, but may have some lapses in clarity  
• Analytical sections have a recognizable organizational pattern, but the relation among parts may not be consistently clear enough to provide a coherent focus; as a whole, the site has a discernible organizational scheme, but navigational elements may be inconsistent, or several elements may not function
• Critical analysis is unevenly developed; writer may offer sufficient reasoning or references to text for some of the ideas but not for others  
• Critical analysis demonstrates some balance between evidence and analysis
• Annotated passage offers a superficial rather than close reading; writer may offer few comments of his or her own, and links and images—several of which may not have a clear relationship to the text—may comprise the bulk of the annotations
• Contains the critical analysis and the annotated passage, but about this site section may be absent or annotated links section may not contain annotations or required minimum number of links
• Gives clear citations for any ideas and words not the author’s own 
• Has adequate page design: satisfactory text and images, adequate use of color, some page clutter; some images, and links do not work toward a purpose 
• Has an adequate style (limited variation in sentence patterns, transitions between most ideas, diction accurate for the most part)  
• Has some errors in grammar, usage or mechanics, but demonstrates basic control of these areas  

• Critical analysis has an unclear thesis 
• Critical analysis lacks focus or demonstrates confused, stereotyped or simplistic thinking; writer may demonstrate no overall conception of the theme 
• May not communicate ideas clearly  
• Analytical sections are ineffectively organized, with no clear relationship between the parts of the essay or text and annotations; as a whole, the site is inadequately organized, with many navigation elements not functioning or absent altogether  
• Critical analysis may not provide adequate or appropriate reasoning or textual references to support generalizations, or may provide details without generalizations  
• Critical analysis demonstrates little relationship between evidence and analysis
• Annotated passage provides a bare-bones reading of the text, with links and images comprising all annotations; many links and images may have no clear relationship to the passage
• Contains critical analysis but may be missing one major section (annotated passage or annotated links and credits)
• Offers unclear citations of work not the author’s own  
• Has weak page design:  some confusing text and images, poor use of color  (glaring), page clutter; many images, links, and animations do not work toward a purpose 
• Has stylistic weaknesses (no variety of sentence patterns, few transitions, imprecise diction)  
• Has occasional major errors in grammar, usage or mechanics or frequent minor errors that interfere in the reader's understanding of the site  

• Critical analysis has no identifiable thesis  
• May be deliberately off-topic and demonstrate no understanding of the theme  
• Does not communicate ideas clearly  
• Analytical sections lack coherent organization; as a whole, the site has no organizational pattern and leaves the viewer with no way to navigate through the pages
• Critical analysis shows no development of ideas; may simply summarize the text
• Annotated passage may simply reproduce the passage and provide a few links
• Contains shorter sections, but critical analysis is absent
• Represents another writer’s work as the author’s own 
• Has incoherent page design:  unclear text and images, no sense to color choice, clutter makes page incomprehensible; images and links have little or no purpose 
• Has an incoherent style (difficulties with sentence structure, pattern of diction errors)  
• Has pervasive pattern of errors in grammar, usage and mechanics that renders the site unreadable