1
Grading Ru
ic for Philosophy Papers
It is a common and worthwhile question for philosophy students to ask - how are written
assignments graded? After all, there is rarely an “answer key” (outside of areas in
formal logic) and it might seem that it is “all a matter of opinion.” This is unduly
pessimistic. Philosophy has clear, and objective, standards for critical thinking and
argumentation. I will expect your papers to strive for, and hopefully achieve, these
standards.
The purpose of this document is to lay out how these standards are applied to papers
you write in the courses I teach. For a fuller explanation of how to write philosophy
essays, with additional information on my evaluation of your written work, please see
the document Writing Philosophy Essays. Below you will find some of the standard
questions I ask while evaluating your written work. You will also find a ru
ic spelling out
some of those standards according to widely used evaluation stages.
I encourage you to use this ru
ic to help construct your argument, and not just to
evaluate your own writing.
1. Thesis
(a) Does the paper have a clear thesis?
(b) Is the thesis presented in the introduction?
(c) Is there a roadmap outlining how the author will establish the thesis?
2. Analyzing Arguments
(a) Explaining the arguments of others
i. Are the arguments of other thinkers clearly and charitably stated? This
includes not only stating the premises and conclusion, but showing how
the conclusion follows and providing any necessary arguments for the
truth of the premises themselves.
ii. Are the technical terms used in the argument explained?
(b) Evaluating the arguments of others
i. Is the argument evaluated for cogency? Are the premises acceptable?
Do the premises provide sufficient grounds for the conclusion?
ii. If objecting, is the objection clearly stated and clearly argued for? In
order to do this, you should not only provide good reasons for believing
your objection applies, but you should explain precisely how it applies to
the opposing argument, and what the consequences for that argument
are.
3. Making Arguments
(a) Are the premises of the argument clearly spelled out?
i. Are the premises supported by appropriate evidence?
(b) Are all empirical claims backed up with supporting evidence?
(c) Are the inferences leading from premises to conclusion cogent?
2
(d) Does the conclusion claim more than the argument shows? For example, be
wary of making a bold or controversial claim that goes beyond your evidence. It
is good to be bold, but only if you have the argument to support it!
(e) Does the paper consider and respond to potential objections?
4. Document Structure
(a) Does the paper have an introduction which spells out what the paper will
argue for?
(b) Does the paper have a conclusion which summarizes what has been
established?
(c) Does the paper relate the central arguments back to the thesis?
5. Style
(a) Is the prose clear and to the point? This includes avoiding flowery language
which does not help you establish your argument. More often than not, this will
simply introduce additional confusions to your argument.
(b) Does the paper employ proper spelling and grammar? I do not expect perfect
grade school grammar. Rather, what I expect is that the grammar is clear and
avoids introducing unnecessary confusions and is (at the least!) syntactically
co
ect.
(c) Is the language used specific rather than vague? Vague language usually
indicates vague and confused thoughts! If your language is vague, ask yourself
what you really mean. If you are not sure, then work out that aspect of your
argument in more detail!
(d) Are all claims based on outside sources cited?
Exceeds
Expectations
Meets Expectations Approaches
Expectations
Below Expectations
I. Argument
(1) Thesis: This is
the thesis of the
essay as well as
the main
conclusion for
your core
argument. It
should address the
main issue of the
writing scenario
and is generally
clearly presented
in the introduction
of the essay.
The thesis is a clear
statement that
esponds to the
appropriate issue
defined in the
writing scenario. It
takes a clear and
unambiguous
position. It is clearly
presented in the
introduction of the
essay.
The thesis addresses
the appropriate issue
ut is not as
unequivocal or
unambiguous as it
could be. It
discusses the
elevant issue but
without making a
direct statement. It is
presented in the
introduction of the
essay
The essay has a
thesis statement but
it is not appropriate
to the writing
assignment. It may
not be explicitly
stated in the
introduction of the
essay or it may be
uried in the body of
the essay.
There is no clear
thesis.
(2) Claims: These
are the main
premises or
easons that you
offer in support of
The essay introduces
a series of
easonable and
elevant claims in
support of the thesis.
Most of the claims
are as described in
the column to the
left.
Most or all of the
claims are
unacceptable at face
value or are not
supported with
There are few if any
claims offered in
support of the
thesis. The author
often begs the
3
your thesis and
core argument.
Your claims
should provide
easonable and
elevant support
for your thesis and
core argument.
Claims are either
acceptable at face
value or are
supported with
subarguments.
Claims employ clear
and unambiguous
terms that is not
emotionally charged.
BUT: One or, at
most, two claims are
described in the
column to the right.
cogent
subarguments. A
easonable person
would not accept the
claim without further
evidence and no
evidence is given.
Claims employ
vague and
ambiguous language
or are overly
emotionally charged.
Claims are only
minimally relevant
to the thesis.
question, simply
eiterating the thesis
statement in slightly
different terms.
(3) Support: Taken
collectively your
claims should
provide sufficient
support for your
thesis to persuade
a reasonable and
informed person
that your thesis is
acceptable.
The essay offers a
series of claims that
provide strong
support for the
thesis. The
arguments are well
developed and
internally consistent.
The essay
anticipates possible
objections and
counterarguments.
The essay offers a
series of claims that
provide adequate
support for the
thesis. Claims are
presented in a
logical order and
establish a clear
chain of reasoning,
ut there are missing
links or otherwise
under-developed
arguments. The
essay doesn’t
anticipate possible
objections and
counterarguments.
The essay has only
weak support for the
thesis. Arguments
are poorly
developed, with
many missing links
or logical failures.
The author may
argue from largely
anecdotal evidence.
Obvious objections
and/or
counterarguments
are ignored.
The essay offers
little or no support
for the thesis.
Claims are
presented in a
seemingly random
order. There is no
apparent order
establishing a
logical argument.
Serious e
ors of
easoning are made.
There are obvious
objections and/or
counterarguments
that are not
addressed.
II. Theoretical
Framework
Philosophical
arguments
generally reflect a
commitment to a
coherent,
developed, and
easonable
theoretical
framework. Your
core argument and
any subarguments
or claims
introduced should
eflect such a
commitment.
The arguments and
claims collectively
eflect a single, well
established coherent
theoretical
framework. The
framework is
elevant to the main
issue of the writing
assignment. The
author demonstrates
a command of the
elevant
philosophical
concepts and
arguments.
The arguments and
claims collectively
do not reflect a
single, well
established coherent
theoretical
framework.
Inconsistent claims
and arguments are
presented drawing
on divergent
theoretical
frameworks. The
author fails to
demonstrate a
command of the
elevant
philosophical
concepts and
arguments.
The author relies on
a weak or
conceptually flawed
theoretical
framework. The
author fails to
demonstrate a
command of the
elevant
philosophical
theories. The
framework relied
upon has obvious
deficiencies not
addressed in the
essay.
There is no
coherent, well
established
theoretical
framework in the
essay. The author
elies upon loosely
elated claims
and/or an
idiosyncratic
framework that is
unacceptable. The
essay mostly
summarizes key
facts of the writing
scenario and
engages in little or
no analysis.
III. Organization
A good philosophy
essay will have an
introduction that
The essay has a clear
concise introduction
that establishes the
thesis and
iefly
The essay has a
concise introduction
that establishes the
thesis. The direction
The essay has an
introduction that
ehearses relevant
details of the
The essay has an
overly long
introduction that
doesn’t clearly
4
states the thesis
and
iefly
provides an
overview of the
argument, a body
that logically
develops the key
arguments, and a
conclusion that ties
everything
together.
eviews the core
argument. The body
of the essay presents
a linked series of
claims supporting
the thesis and
introduced in a
easonable manner.
The conclusion ties
things together and
addresses any
elevant remaining
points.
of the core
argument is not
clear. The body
presents a series of
linked claims
supporting the thesis
ut the order of
claims and direction