Mathematics Analytical Rubric

Question Title

* 1. COURSE NUMBER

Question Title

* 2. SECTION NUMBER

Question Title

* 3. YEAR/SEMESTER

Question Title

* 4. FOCUS

(4) Exemplary:
▪ Paper addresses the
central topic completely
and in an interesting
way.

(3) Accomplished
▪ Paper addresses the
central topic completely.

(2) Developing
▪ Paper addresses the
central topic adequately.

(1) Beginning
▪ Paper addresses the
central topic poorly.

(0) Unacceptable
▪ Paper does not
address the central
topic.

Question Title

* 5. ORGANIZATION & DEVELOPMENT

(4) Exemplary
▪ Paper contains an
introduction which
clearly explains the
content of the paper,
introduces the main
theorem, introduces
notation and explains
the relationship of the
paper with other
mathematical theories.
▪ Paper develops the
theory in an clear and
interesting way, which
is logical and self
contained.
▪ Paper contains
references that are
highly relevant.
▪ Author shows a clear
understanding of the
relevant mathematical
theories which is
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Author has clearly
developed critical
thinking and higher
order thinking skills that
are appropriate to
her/his class. ▪ Author shows high
creativity in writing
about a theory that is
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Explanations are clear
and interesting.

(3) Accomplished
▪ Paper contains an
introduction which
explains the content of
the paper, introduces
the main theorem,
introduces notation and
explains the relationship
of the paper with other
mathematical theories.
▪ Paper develops the
theory in a way, which is
always logical and self
contained.
▪ Paper contains
references that are
adequate.
▪ Author shows an
understanding of the
relevant mathematical
theories which is
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Author has developed
critical thinking and
higher order thinking
skills that are
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Author shows creativity
in writing about a theory that is appropriate to
her/his class.
▪ Explanations are often
clear.

(2) Developing
▪ Paper contains an
introduction which
occasionally explains the
content of the paper,
introduces the main
theorem, introduces
notation and explains the
relationship of the paper
with other mathematical
theories. ▪ Author shows
occasional creativity in
writing about a theory
that is appropriate to
her/his class.
▪ Explanations are
occasionally clear.
▪ Paper develops the
theory in an way, which
is often logical and self
contained.
▪ Paper contains
references that are often
adequate.
▪ Author shows an
occasional
understanding of the
relevant mathematical
theories which is
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Author shows signs
that is developing critical
thinking and higher order
thinking skills that are
appropriate to her/his
class.

(1) Beginning
▪ Paper contains an
introduction which hardly
explains the content of the
paper, introduces the main
theorem, introduces
notation and explains the
relationship of the paper
with other mathematical
theories.
▪ Paper develops the
theory in an poor way,
which lacks sufficient
evidence or proof or is not
self contained.
▪ Paper contains
references that are
occasionally adequate.
▪ Author shows a poor
understanding of the
relevant mathematical
theories which is
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Author shows almost no
signs that is developing
critical thinking and higher
order thinking skills that
are appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Author shows poor creativity in writing about a theory that is appropriate to her/his class.
▪ Explanations are
unclear.

(0) Unacceptable
▪ Paper contains an
introduction which does
not explain the content
of the paper or
introduces the main
theorem or introduces
notation and explains
the relationship of the
paper with other
mathematical theories.
▪ Paper does not
develop the theory in a
logical and self
contained way.
▪ Paper does not
contain adequate
references.
▪ Author shows no
understanding of the
relevant mathematical
theories which is
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Author shows no signs
that is developing
critical thinking and
higher order thinking
skills that are
appropriate to her/his
class. ▪ Author shows no
creativity in writing
about a theory that is
appropriate to her/his
class.
▪ Explanations are very
hard to understand.

Question Title

* 6. STYLE & SENTENCE STRUCTURE

(4) Exemplary
▪ Author uses a variety
of sentence structure
consistently.

(3) Accomplished
▪ Author uses a variety
of sentence structure.

(2) Developing
▪ Author occasionally
uses a variety of
sentence structure.

(1) Beginning
▪ Author hardly uses a
variety of sentence
structure.

(0) Unacceptable
▪ Author never uses a
variety of sentence
structure.

Question Title

* 7. GRAMMAR & MECHANICS

(4) Exemplary
▪ Excellent use of
mathematical language.
▪ No grammatical
errors.

(3) Accomplished
▪ Almost no mistakes in
the use of mathematical
language.
▪ Almost no grammatical
errors.

(2) Developing
▪ Some mistakes in the
use of mathematical
language.
▪ Some grammatical
errors.

(1) Beginning
▪ Many mistakes in the use of mathematical language.
▪ Many grammatical errors.

(0) Unacceptable
▪ Too many mistakes in
the use of mathematical
language.
▪ Too many
grammatical errors.

Question Title

* 8. RESEARCH

(4) Exemplary
▪ Author justifies all
claims properly by
either citing conclusions
in the paper or
theorems proved in the
references.
▪ Author shows a clear
understanding of the
literature related to the
paper.
▪ Complete absence of
plagiarism.
▪ Author shows high
creativity in
synthesizing theory that
is appropriate to her/his
class.

(3) Accomplished
▪ Author justifies most
claims properly by either
citing conclusions in the
paper or theorems
proved in the
references.
▪ Author shows an
understanding of the
literature related to the
paper.
▪ Complete absence of
plagiarism.
▪ Author shows creativity
in synthesizing theory
that is appropriate to
her/his class.

(2) Developing
▪ Author occasionally
justifies claims properly
by either citing
conclusions in the paper
or theorems proved in
the references.
▪ Author shows an
occasional
understanding of the
literature related to the
paper.
▪ Complete absence of
plagiarism.
▪ Author shows
occasional creativity in
synthesizing theory that
is appropriate to her/his
class.

(1) Beginning
▪ Author almost never
justifies claims properly by
either citing conclusions in
the paper or theorems
proved in the references.
▪ Author shows a poor
understanding of the
literature related to the
paper.
▪ Complete absence of
plagiarism.
▪ Author shows poor
creativity in synthesizing
theory that is appropriate
to her/his class.

(0) Unacceptable
▪ Author never justifies
claims properly by
either citing conclusions
in the paper or
theorems proved in the
references.
▪ Author shows no
understanding of the
literature related to the
paper.
▪ Evidence of
plagiarism.
▪ Author shows no
creativity in synthesizing
theory that is
appropriate to her/his
class.