WID I GRADING FORM & RUBRIC

Abnormal Psychology (Spring 2016)

STUDENT: Name
DUE DATE: February 07

DATE SUBMITTED:

GRAMMAR:
# of Errors Per Page
Less than 2 errors/typos
3 to 4 errors/typos
5 to 6 errors/typos

# of Points Deducted
None
4.5
9

# of Errors Per Page

7 to 8 errors/typos
9 or more errors/typos

# of Points Deducted
13.5
18

FORMAT: [6 Points (10% of paper grade)]

(Does the paper conform to the required format?)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

????

Typed, double-spaced:
Font size #12 or equivalent, margins 1 inch all sides:
Page numbers:
Number of pages per assignment (4):
Title page:
References Page & APA Style:

1
1
1
1
1
1

GRADING RUBRC I [(Intellectual Standards: 30 Points (50% of paper grade)]

0
0
0
0
0
0
????

(Detailed descriptions of each category below are in the Handout on Critical Thinking in
Abnormal Psychology, Handout on Applying Critical Thinking to Writing, and Blooms
Taxonomy, which is found in the syllabus).
1. Clarity of Ideas, etc.:
2. Accuracy:
3. Precision:
4. Relevance:
5. Significance:
6. Depth in Covering Topic:
7. Breadth in Covering Topic:
8. Logic/Organization
9. Fairness
10. Completeness

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

WID I Grading Form and Rubric Continued

Page 2

GRADING RUBRIC II [(Elements of Reasoning: 24 points (40% of paper grade)] ????

(This section will reflect mostly content that echoes the elements of reasoning, which are
described in more detail in the Handout on Critical Thinking in Abnormal Psychology, Handout
on Applying Critical Thinking to Writing).
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

Purpose, goal, objective:

The Key Question(s):
Scientific Info Applied:
Interpretations/Inferences:
Concepts/Theories:
Assumptions:
Implications/Consequences:
Points of View:

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

TOTAL POINTS EARNED:

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
_????_

TOTAL MAXIMUM POINTS: 60

DEDUCTIONS FOR GRAMMAR: (????)
DEDUCTIONS FOR LATENESS: (????)
POINTS EARNED: _????_
COMMENTS:

PERCENTAGE _ ????%_

LETTER GRADE:_????_

WID I Grading Form and Rubric Continued

Page 3

RUBRIC DESCRIPTION
An A-level paper demonstrates superior achievement in grasping how clinical psychologists
think along with a superior development of thinking skills or abilities. More specifically, the
writer consistently articulated clearly, accurately, and precisely the concepts, theories and ideas;
and, they were used correctly and effectively. The writer distinguishes relevant from irrelevant
ideas and reflects both a depth and breadth of understanding at more profound levels. The writer
focuses on the significant aspects of an issue or problem and writes in a well organized manner
that flows logically. The writer refrains from misrepresenting contrary viewpoints and completes
her ideas to their logical conclusion. She articulates well the key question(s) and assumptions in
language used by clinical psychologists; and she makes her purpose clear to the reader and
supports her ideas by scientific evidence used by clinical psychologists. The reader can easily
identify and understand the writers interpretations and assumptions. The writer addresses the
consequences and implications of the evidence, and presents a well-reasoned point of view.
Overall, there is consistent excellence in the paper from beginning to end.
A B-level paper demonstrates good achievement in grasping how abnormal psychologists think
along with a good development of thinking skills or abilities. More specifically, the writer
usually articulates clearly, accurately, and precisely the concepts, theories and ideas she uses; and,
they are mostly used correctly and effectivelythere may be minor errors in details and they may
not always be effectively integrated into the paper. The writer usually distinguishes relevant from
irrelevant ideas and usually reflects both a depth and breadth of understanding at more profound
levels. But, there may still be some lingering superficiality. The writer may not focus on all the
significant aspects of an issue or problem and writes in an organized manner that follows a good
logic but with some bumps in flow. She refrains from misrepresenting contrary viewpoints and
completes most of her ideas to their logical conclusion. The purpose and key questions may not
always be as clear as they could be but they are readily apparent; they are supported by
appropriate evidence (e.g. scientific). The reader can usually identify the writers interpretations
and assumptions. The writer addresses many but not all the important consequences and
implications of the evidence, and presents a reasoned point of view. Overall, there is mastery at a
higher than average level but with some gaps in the intellectual standards, the elements of
reasoning or both.
A C-level paper illustrates some emerging achievement in grasping what thinking in abnormal
psychology is along with thinking skills and abilities. More specifically, the writer inconsistently
articulates clearly, accurately, and precisely the concepts, theories and ideas she uses; and, they
are not always used correctly and effectively. The writer sometimes distinguishes relevant from
irrelevant ideas and sometimes reflects both a depth and breadth of understanding at superficial
levels. The writer may miss some of the significant aspects of an issue or problem and writes in
an unorganized manner that makes is difficult to follow the logic. The writer may (or may not)
refrain from misrepresenting contrary viewpoints and usually does not fully integrate her ideas
and follow them to their logical conclusion. The purpose and key questions may be missing or
often implied but not stated; they may or may not be supported by appropriate evidence (e.g.
scientific). The reader usually has a difficult time identifying the writers interpretations and
assumptions. She usually addresses some but not all the important consequences and implications
of the evidence, and may not present a readily identifiable reasoned point of view. Overall, there
is mastery at the minimum level but with plenty of room for improvement.

WID I Grading Form and Rubric Continued

Page 4

A D-level paper shows only a minimal level of understanding of what psychological thinking is,
along with minimal development of thinking skills and abilities. The writing shows occasional
psychological thinking skills, but frequent uncritical thinking. The writing does not meet the
minimum standards for mastery. More specifically, the writer does not articulate clearly,
accurately, and precisely the concepts, theories and ideas she uses; and, they are often used
incorrectly and ineffectively. The writer often does not distinguish relevant from irrelevant ideas
and often does not reflect a depth and breadth of understanding. The writer usually misses some
of the significant aspects of an issue or problem and writes in an unorganized manner that makes
is difficult to follow the logic. She may (or may not) refrain from misrepresenting contrary
viewpoints and usually does not fully integrate her ideas and follow them to their logical
conclusion. The purpose and key questions are often missing (or implied at best) but not stated;
scientific evidence is usually missing. The reader has a difficult time identifying the writers
interpretations and assumptions. She often does not address the important consequences and
implications of the evidence, and may not present a readily identifiable reasoned point of view.
Overall, there is a lack of mastery at the minimum level. It may seem as though the writer went
through the motions of the assignment carrying out the form without getting into the spirit of it,
which often shows little effort.
An F-level paper fails to display an understanding of the basic nature of psychological thinking,
and in any case does not display the psychological thinking skills and abilities that are at the heart
of this course. The writing shows a lack of performance at the minimal passable level in most
categories of the intellectual standards and elements of reasoning. Specifically, the writer does
not articulate clearly, accurately, and precisely the concepts, theories and ideas she uses; and, they
are not used correctly and effectively. The writer often does not distinguish relevant from
irrelevant ideas and does not reflect a depth and breadth of understanding. The writer misses
many of the significant aspects of an issue or problem and writes in an unorganized and illogical
manner. The writer may (or may not) refrain from misrepresenting contrary viewpoints and does
not integrate her ideas and follow them to their logical conclusion. The purpose and key
questions are missing as is scientific evidence. The writers interpretations and assumptions are
illusive. The writer does not address the important consequences and implications of the
evidence, and may not present a readily identifiable reasoned point of view. Overall, there is a
lack of mastery at the minimum level. There is little demonstrable effort. The paper does not
display discernible psychological reasoning and problem-solving skills.