Elements of Quality Writing for the Web, Part 2: Lessons from Rubrics

Tue, 07/10/2012

In the first part of this series, I included some of my basic observations about what distinguished quality writing for the web from poor web writing, but these were just my observations. How can we be sure that these standards are not just my peevish tendencies? I propose that one way we could get a context for more "universal" standards of quality writing is to look at grading rubrics.

When I first started teaching, one of the hardest lessons I had to learn was how to grade student papers. I'd been reading and writing for more than 20 years, so I felt like I had a sense of what made some writing better than others, but how could I break that down into standards that could be used to divide student writing into A's, B's, C's, D's, and F's in a way that students could understand and accept as fair? The answer used by many universities, testing facilities, and others is the grading rubric. For those who haven't taught (or graded essays for Kaplan), a rubric is a systematic scoring guideline that lays out specific qualities that writing must attain to be considered "A" quality, "B" quality, and so on. 

Although not intended for the purpose of evaluating web writing, I believe these rubrics can point the way toward what is generally considered good writing, which can then be extrapolated toward evaluating web writing. And, to make sure it's not just reinforcing lessons I learned at the University of Kansas, we'll use rubrics from other teachers readily available on the Internet.

First, from the rubric for freshman composition at Winthrop University:

An A paper is extraordinary work that more than fulfills the requirements of the assignment. This essay tackles the topic in an innovative way, with a clear sense of audience and purpose, an insightful thesis, and an appropriate and effective organization. The structure is carefully planned; each section of the essay develops the thesis with logical arguments and specific, conclusive evidence which has been interpreted and clearly related to the writer's point. The style is energetic and precise: the sentence structure is varied and the words are carefully chosen. How the writer says things is as excellent as what the writer says. There is evidence of careful editing since the essay contains few grammatical and/or mechanical errors and, if necessary, is correctly documented using MLA format.

Now, from a sample rubric at Troy University:

Merits a Grade of A—Excellent in all areas

□ Superior ideas and insights; clear and complex; witty or especially original
□ Purpose clear throughout (unity)
□ Expectations established and fulfilled very satisfactorily; satisfying closure (organization)
□ Ideas connected clearly and smoothly (coherence); smooth transition between paragraphs
□ Superior development (concreteness and/or examples, details, support)
□ Writer is aware of audience
□ Writer seems to mean what is said; genuine involvement in subject responding to the
assignment
□ Mature style; effective use of language
□ Relatively free of any errors distracting to literate readers
 
Finally, let's look at one from a colleague of mine teaching at the University of Northern Colorado, intended to grade essays of higher-level undergraduate students:
A—The "A" essay demonstrates superior writing ability. It is distinguished by its fully and effectively developed content
and by its rhetorical sophistication. An essay in this category typically:
• responds to the topic with insight, depth, or originality, while clearly meeting the terms of the assignment
o thesis statement is concise, specific, and unified
o thesis statement clearly controls body of paper
o uses a wide range of rhetorical devices and appropriate secondary sources to establish argument
o demonstrates firm understanding of rhetorical devices and definitions evoked in paper
o if the OED is used, use of definition(s) shows thoughtful awareness of audience
 if multiple definitions of single word are used, they are presented in a systematic and informative
way so as to not overwhelm audience with too much information at once and to show how
multiple levels of meaning contribute to thesis
• has a clearly focused, coherently developed main idea and is effectively organized
o shows how multiple rhetorical devices work simultaneously--rather than separately--to create meaning
• uses specific examples and details, from both primary and secondary sources, appropriately and effectively
o quotations are preceded by informative and analytical lead-ins to guide audience
o all quotations are incorporated INTO analytical sentences rather than placed between writer's sentences
o material from secondary sources clearly contribute to the paper's argument
• effectively deals with significant opposing or alternative viewpoints in a way that advances the main argument
• exhibits superior control of language, including diction, phrasing, and syntactic variety
• avoids serious errors in mechanics grammar, and usage, although it may have a few minor flaws
 
What is remarkable about these three different rubrics from three different universities is the level of agreement about what constitutes good writing:
  • Originality and insight
  • Clear organization
  • Use of specific evidence and examples
  • Superior control of language
  • Avoidance of errors in grammar and usage
  • Audience awareness (cited in 2 of 3 rubrics, probably assumed in the higher-level rubric since it's directed at English majors)

Now, you may argue (as some political factions have argued) that university education is biased and does not reflect real-world standards in anything, let alone quality of writing. Tomorrow we will look at what Google has said about quality in writing from the standpoint of search ranking and see if it corresponds to the standards we have developed so far. 

Image courtesy of: http://ramdomlyincoherent.wordpress.com