AP Literature Prose Rubric 181 98 Persuasive analysis of author uses literary devices to depict subject. Makes a strong case for interpretation. Considers a variety of literary devices. Engages text through apt and specific references. Perceptive analysis. Writing is clear. Essay is effectively organized. 9 has more sophisticated analysi has more effective control of language. 76 Reasonable analysis of how author depicts the subject. Sustained and competent reading of the passage. Attention to literary devices. Less perceptive than 9/8. Less convincing than 9/8. Ideas are presented with clarity, Ideas are presented with control, Refers to text for support. 7 presents better developed analysis than 6. ‘7 has more consistent command of elements of effective composition than 6. Plausible reading of the passage. Superficial analysis Thin analysis. ‘Attention to literary devices may be slight. Support from passage may tend toward summary or paraphrase. ‘Adequate control of language but marred by surface errors. ‘Not well conceived, Not well organized. Not fully developed. plano oooecofbo00000000|000005000 y g offe ade alysis of the 7 ae pata mueorwennes _mesiS iS unclear/ nai unconvincing. not Spectre Analysis is irrelevant. May ignore more difficult task of the prompt. . May ignore literary devices. -only device used Unfocused presentation of ideas. 1s. Imagery Repetitive presentation of ideas. ‘Absence of textual support. ‘Accumulation of errors. Significant misreading, Demonstrates inept writing 2 Ip ooo oooojs00000 Persistently misread the passage. ‘Unacceptably brief. Pervasive errors that interfere with understanding. Does respond to prompt. LUttle clarity LUttle organization. Ltle support from the passage. ttle coherent discussion.AP Literature Poetry Rubric 180 38 Persuasive discussion and convincing analysis of poet’s use of poetic devices and how they convey ‘meaning. Consistent and effective control over elements of composition. Language appropriate to the analysis of poetry. Textual references are apt and specific. Perceptive analysis. Sophisticated writ o 76 Reasonable discussion and reasonable analysis of poetic devices and how they convey meaning. Less thorough or less precise in their discussion of author's use of poetic devices than 8/9. ‘Analysis of relationship between devices and meaning is less convincing than 8/9. Expresses ideas clearly. Makes references to the text. 7 has better developed analysis and more consistent command of the elements of effective composition hana 6. | © Plausible discussion and plausible analysis of poet’s use of poetic devices and how they convey meaning, 0. Superfcia in discussion, 0 agve. , . 7 rormiaie. SHOWS organization is present (Minimally supported by references to the text. CO Relies on paraphrase. Minor misinterretation ofthe poem 1 Has some control of language but possesses surface errors. Not well conceived 1 Not well organized. 0_Not well developed. pocooojsooo00 34 {1 fails to offer an adequate analysis of the poem. Partial analysis. B_Unconvincing analysis. 1D Ignores the poet's use of poetic devices to convey meaning. 1D Ignores the meaning of the work. D._Evidence from poems slight. Evidence is misconstrued. Only paraphrases. 1D Writing lacks control over conventions of composition. 1D. Inadequate develop of ideas. O Accumulation of errors 1 Focusis unclear. 1 Focusis inconsistent. 1D Focus is repetitive Contains a significant misreading. G_inept writing - 'DSome attempt was made to respond to prompt. Uitte clarity. Uitte organization. 11 Uttle support from the poem. 1. Serious errors in grammar and mechanics, D Complete misreading D_Unacceptably brief. O._Uttle coherent discussion of the poemAP Literature Prose Rubric 181 Persuasive analysis of author uses literary devices to depict subject. Makes a strong case for interpretation. Considers a variety of literary devices. Engages text through apt and specific references. Perceptive analysis. Writing is clear. Essay is effectively organized. ‘has more sophisticated analysis. ‘has more effective control of language. Reasonable analysis of how author depicts the subject. stained and competent eaig ofthe passage. Attention to literary devices. Less perceptive than 9/8 low Gveading O_ Jess convincing than 9/8. ~ essa presented with clarity. of passage ts 2 pleas ae presented ith ona plausible put not f ooloo0000000 fers to text for support. particularly ve D7 presents better developed analysis than 6. THINK abow oF, has more consistent command of elements of effective composition than6. OVW Plausible reading of the passage. presen Superficial analysis analysis that Tn ana . {Attention to teary dvies maybe sight. is out of the ‘Support from passage may tend toward summary or paraphrase. vox Adequate control of language but marred by surface errors. Not well conceived. Not well organized. otf dvloped Fails to offer an adequate analysis of the passage. pays porta. Analysis is unconvincing. Analysis is irrelevant. May ignore more difficult task of the prompt. May ignore literary devices. Unfocused presentation of ideas. Repetitive presentation of ideas. ‘Absence of textual support. Accumulation of errors. Significant misreading. Demonstrates inept writing. 2 Persistently misread the passage. Unacceptably bref. Pervasive errors that interfere with understanding. oes respond to prompt. Uttle clarity. Little organization. tte support from the passage. tte coherent discussion. Moooocoolsoooeeeooonolbooo00AP Literature Poetry Rubric 180 EO) a Fess Ucuson and canoig aah of poo of posi dees and Po thoy comey meaning. Consistent and effective controlover elements of composition, SLY Language appropriate to the analysis of poetry. connector’ 40 history 1D Fextual references are apt and specific. i Perceptive analysis. in conclusion is O _ Sophisticated writing. 7-6 | 0 Reasonable discussion and reasonable analysis of poetic devices and how they convey meaning. G._Less thorough or less precise in their discussion of author's use of poetic devices than 8/9. Analysis of relationship between devices and meaning is less convincing than 8/9. Expresses ideas clearly. ‘Makes references tothe text. 0 7has better developed analysis and more consistent command of the elements of effective composition than a 6. 5 | © Plausible discussion and plausbleanalyls of poets use of poctic devices and how they convey meaning. O_ Superficial in discussion. Vague. Formulaic. O Minimally supported by references to the text. Relies on paraphrase. | Minor misinterpretation of the poem. Has some control of language but possesses surface errors. Not well conceived. Not well organized. O_Notwell developed. 3-4 | fails to offer an adequate analysis of the poem, Partial analysis. 1 Unconvincing analysts. Ignores the poet's use of poetic devices to convey meaning. 1D Ignoresithe meaning ofthe work. Evidence from poem is sight. O. Evidence is misconstrued. | Only paraphrases. (0 Writing lacks control over conventions of composition. 0 Inadequate develop of ideas. 0 Accumulation of errors. Focus is unclear 2 Focusis inconsistent. | | Focusis repetitive. 0 Contains a significant misreading. | O_Inept writing. Zi] 0 Some attempt was made to respondo prompt. 0 Ute dry. 0. Utte organization. (Ute support from the poem. Serious errrsin grammar and mechani. Complete misreading. © Unaceeptably re. O_Little coherent discussion of the poemAP Literature Prose Rubric 181 TD Persuasive analysis of author uses literary devices to depict subject. oo0o000 Makes a strong case for interpretation. Considers a variety of literary devices. Engages text through apt and specific references. Perceptive analysis Writing i clear. Essay is effectively organized. 9 has more sophisticated analysis. S.has more effective control of language. do00000009q|c oa oO Reasonable analysis of how author depicts the subject. ‘Sustained and competent reading of the passage. Attention to literary devices Less perceptive than 9/8. Less convincing than 9/8, Ideas are presented with clarity. Ideas are presented with control Refers to text for support 7 presents better developed analysis than 6. ‘7 has more consistent command of elements of effective composition than 6. Plausible reading of the passage. Superficial analysis Thin analysis. Attention to literary devices may be slight. ‘Support from passage may tend toward summary or paraphrase. idequate control of language but marred by surface errors. o/ Not well conceived. a oa Ibo aooooo|ac Not well organized. Not fully developed. (1, Fails to offer an adequate analysis ofthe passage. Analysis is partial Analysis is unconvincing. ‘Analysis Is irelevant. May ignore more difficult task of the prompt. May ignore literary devices. Unfocused presentation of ideas. Repetitive presentation of ideas. ‘Absence of textual support. ‘Accumulation of errors. Significant misreading. Demonstrates inept writing. Persistently misread the passage Unacceptably brief Pervasive errors that interfere with understanding. Does respond to prompt: Little arty. ttle organkzation. Little support from the passage. Little coherent discussion -what \s proader meaning of tne 4ext? Look past competitive aspect of wera cdAP Literature Poetry Rubric 180 Persuasive discus meaning. Consistent and effective control over elements of composition. Language appropriate to the analysis of poetry. Textual references are apt and specific. Perceptive analysis. Sophisticated writing. o ‘and convincing analysis of poet's use of poetic devices and how they convey Reasonable discussion and reasonable analysis of poetic devices and how they convey meaning. Less thorough or less precise in their discussion of author’ use of poetic devices than 8/9, ‘Analysis of relationship between devices and meaning is less convincing than 8/9. Expresses ideas clearly, Makes references tothe text. 7 has better developed analysis and more consistent command of the elements of effective composition than a 6. W Plausible discussion and plausible analysis of poet's use of poetic devices and how they convey meaning. ©. ‘Supericial in discussion, poooaolso000 Nague. lefs work on move Pharma formal, aca clemic ‘Minimally supported by refer he © Relies on paraphvase rencesto the es writing . , Minor misinterpretation ofthe poem. pes some control of language but possesses surface errors. Not well conceived. Not well organized. Not wel developed. a Fails to offer an adequate analysis ofthe poem. Partial analysis. Unconvincing analysis. Ignores the poet's use of poetic devices to convey meaning. Ignores the meaning of the work, Evidence from poem is sight. Evidence is misconstrued. Only paraphrases. Writing lacks control over conventions of composition. Inadequate develop of ideas. ‘Accumulation of errors, Focus's unclear. Focus is inconsistent. Focus is repetitive, Contains a significant misreading. Inept writing. ‘Somie attempt was made to respond to prompt. Ute larity. ttle organization. Little support from the poem. Serious errors in grammar and mechanics. Complete misreading. Unacceptably brie. Little coherent discussion of the poem lb poo coco ooooooooooooooo|sa hae