Spiritual Reflection Paper – RubricNo of Criteria: 7 Achievement Levels: 5CriteriaAchievement LevelsDescriptionPercentageUnsatisfactory0.00 %Less than Satisfactory74.00 %Satisfactory79.00 %Good87.00 %Excellent100.00 %Content70.0Testimony20.0Paper does not address the testimony of the student.Paper begins to address the testimony of the student, but is not clear.Paper addresses the testimony of the student.Paper addresses the testimony of the student sufficiently, but does not offer a critical assessment of the conversion of the student.Paper thoroughly and sufficiently covers the testimony of the student and includes critical thoughts about the conversion of the student.Faith Journey20.0Paper does not address the faith journey of the student.Paper begins to address the faith journey of the student, but is not clear.Paper addresses the faith journey of the student.Paper addresses the faith journey of the student, but does not offer a critical assessment of the journey.Paper thoroughly and sufficiently covers the faith journey of the student and includes critical assessment of the journey.Spiritual Growth30.0Paper does not address the spiritual growth of the student.Paper begins to address the spiritual growth of the student, but is not clear.Paper addresses the spiritual growth of the student.Paper addresses spiritual growth of the student, but does not offer a critical assessment of that growth.Paper thoroughly and sufficiently covers the spiritual growth of the student and includes a critical assessment of that growth.Organization and Effectiveness20.0Thesis Development and Purpose7.0Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.Argument Logic and Construction8.0Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)5.0Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.Format10.0Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)10.0Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.All format elements are correct.
