LSC 251: Science, Media and Society
Spring 2018
LSC 251, Spring 2018
Writing Assignment #1: Peer review grading rubric
You can use this form for offline reviewing.
Type your comments into this document, and then use cut-and-paste to transfer each
comment into the web review form.
You cannot directly submit this file.
Comments
Identify the main strengths and weaknesses in the document. Be specific. Provide clear
suggestions for improvement.
Comment 1 (required):
Comment 2:
Comment 3:
Comment 4:
Comment 5:
How convincing is the author’s explanation of why the issue is politicized? Do they address the
reasons discussed in class?
Comment 1 (required):
Comment 2:
Is the essay in good, fluent, and accurate English? Is it well presented in terms of spelling,
punctuation, and the list of references?
Comment 1 (required):
Comment 2:
Ratings
Assess the author’s description of their selected issue (fracking, stem cell research, or vaccines).
7 - Exemplary: The issue is thoughtfully described: the science itself, any controversy, and
stakeholders are all mentioned.
5 - Acceptable: The issue adequately described, some aspects of the issue (science,
controversy, stakeholders) are mentioned.
3 - Developing: The issue is described, but barely OR aspects of the issue (science,
controversy, stakeholders) are not mentioned.
1 - Below Expectations: There is no description of the issue.
How well did the author explain why their selected issue is politicized?
7 - Exemplary: The author thoughtfully explained why the issue is politicized, and relied
heavily on the reasons discussed in class for why science is politicized (mentioned at
least three).
5 - Acceptable: The author adequately explained why the issue is politicized, and
mentioned at least two of the reasons discussed in class for why science is politicized.
3 - Developing: The author explained one to two reasons why the issue is politicized.
1 - Below Expectations: The author did not provide any reasons why the issue is
politicized.
Rate the author’s arguments for what scientists could have done to prevent the issue from
becoming politicized.
7 - Exemplary: Supporting arguments for possible strategies are convincing.
5 - Acceptable: Supporting arguments for possible strategies are plausible but not
completely fleshed out.
3 - Developing: Supporting arguments for possible strategies are lacking.
1 - Below Expectations: No supporting arguments for possible strategies are presented.
Rate the quality of the author’s two possible strategies to prevent politicization.
7 - Exemplary: Strategies are clear and complete.
5 - Acceptable: Strategies are present but has limited detail.
3 - Developing: Strategies are partially described OR details are confusing.
1 - Below Expectations: Strategies are not described.
Describe how well the paper draws on lectures and course material.
7 - Exemplary: The paper effectively incorporates relevant content discussed in course
materials to support claims.
5 - Acceptable: The paper incorporates some relevant content discussed in course
materials, and most claims are supported by class discussions and readings.
3 - Developing: The paper incorporates some content discussed in course materials, but
there are few claims left unsupported by class discussions and readings.
1 - Below Expectations: The paper insufficiently incorporates some content discussed in
course materials, i.e., claims are not supported by class discussions and readings.
Does the writer demonstrate a good grasp of standard writing conventions (e.g., spelling,
punctuation, capitalization, grammar, usage, paragraphing, citing) and use conventions effectively
to enhance readability?
7 - Exemplary: Demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English and
has few or no minor errors.
5 - Acceptable: Generally demonstrates control with the conventions of standard written
English but may have some errors.
3 - Developing: Contains occasional major errors or frequent minor errors in grammar,
usage, or mechanics that can interfere with meaning.
1 - Below expectations: Contains serious errors in grammar, usage, or mechanics that
frequently obscure meaning.
Part of this exercise is to communicate complex ideas clearly within the constraints of the page
limit. This assignment should be about 2 pages long (double-spaced, not counting references).
Use the following scale to balance the length and quality of response.
7 - Exemplary: Not counting references, the assignment is almost exactly 2 pages long
(±4 lines); OR Not counting references, the assignment is between 1.0-2.0 pages long,
but the author responded extremely well, i.e., scored “Exemplary” on all other ratings.
5 - Acceptable: Not counting references, the assignment is about 0.25-0.5 page under or
over the requirement (between 1.5-2.5 pages long).
3 - Developing: Not counting references, the assignment is about 0.5-1.0 page under or
over the requirement (between 1.0-3.0 pages long).
1 - Below Expectations: Not counting references, the assignment is more than one page
under or over the requirement (less than 1.0 pages or more than 3.0 pages long).
