• home
  • about
  • updates
  • publications
  • press
  • contact
  • rubrics
  • forum
  • training
  • results
  • closing the loop

Synthesis of Book Reviews Rubric

Synthesis of Book Reviews Rubric
Attributes
 
Not Acceptable Emerging Developing Proficient
Variety & appropriateness of book reviews selected Reviews selected did not represent a reasonable variety. Criteria for selection not mentioned. Criteria for selection were superficial. Choices weak. Choices logical. Only partially or superficially explained criteria in terms of perspective, purpose, tone or discipline. Excellent choices. Fully articulated criteria in terms of perspective, purpose, tone or discipline.
Identifying key concepts in  sources, book reviews and book Does not discuss key ideas or concepts in book review sources. Attempts to identify main points or ideas in at least one book review source and book. Discusses at least one idea (may not be key) in both book review sources and book. Clearly discusses key ideas in both book reviews and book, including nuances.
Identifying and describing interrelationships among key concepts in book reviews and book Does not identify interrelationships among key concepts in book reviews or book. Identifies one or more interrelationships among key concepts in at least one book review and book. Identifies two or more interrelationships among key concepts and combines them into new or fresh statements, but fails to fully develop or explain interrelationships. Identifies two or more interrelationships among key concepts and combines them into new rich statements, drawing interesting conclusions with supporting evidence.
Relating own experiences of the book to the published book reviews Does not refer to own experience with book at all. Incorporates some acknowledgment of own experience with book but not in a substantive way. Makes a good attempt to integrate own experience in a substantive way. Own experience with the book clearly informs the discussion.
Organizing synthesis argument logically into coherent paper Reader cannot follow. Paper is not coherent or logically organized. Evidence of overall plan, but lacks either clear transitions or coherence. Clear overall plan but some problems with either coherence or transitions. Coherent argument, logically organized with clear smooth transitions.
Support of main thesis/ controlling ideas Fails to support thesis/ideas with details, examples, analysis or generalization. Limited, inconsistent or very weak support of thesis/ideas. Adequate support of thesis/ideas with details, examples, analysis or generalization. Thoughtfully supports thesis/ideas with details, examples, analysis or generalization.
Title Title is simply an obvious restatement of the assignment, inappropriate to topic or missing. Title is vague, fails to capture the theme of the paper, or doesn’t match the content well. Title adequately reflects the content, theme, viewpoint of the paper. The essay has an interesting, original title that supports the style and viewpoint of the writer.
Prose and style Serious problems with clarity, diction, vocabulary, syntax and/or mechanics. Some problems with clarity, diction, syntax and/or mechanics. Control of syntax and diction but lacking in precision and variety. Precision and variety of diction and syntax.
Effective academic voice
 
Voice is inappropriate or inconsistent, too formal or informal; often overly vague or preachy. Voice sounds like a “skool” essay, written to fulfill an assignment, proficient and fluent but not engaged or unique. May sound canned, arrogant or close-minded. Voice is a good attempt at being fair and open-minded, ethically-aware, questioning, intellectually hard-working, engaged. Voice is curious, fair and open-minded, ethically-aware, questioning, intellectually hard-working, engaged.
Integrating sources No evidence or misuse of quotation, paraphrase and/or summary to support main argument. Problems with using quotation, paraphrase and/or summary to support main argument. Demonstrates competence in using quotation, paraphrase and summary. Makes sophisticated use of quotation, paraphrase and summary to support main arguments.
Citing sources in proper style. Source list incomplete, errors are major and numerous. All sources cited but there are numerous and major errors. All sources cited but there are numerous minor errors. Source list is complete and only minor errors.
 
Santa Clara University
Jill Goodman-Gould, Gail Gradowski                                                      15 September 2011

Information literacy learning outcomes associated with this assignment: 1.1 f; 1.2. a, b, d; 1.4 b; 3.1 a, c; 3.2 a, b, c,d; 3.3 a; 3.4 b, c, f; 4.1 a, c; 5.3 a (http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/informationliteracycompetency.cfm)