Kubernesis

1) Thesis: Does your argument take up a clear position and is that position controversial? Does it address current events or positions? Does it show a creative or critical strategy for solving familiar problems, or does it effectively point out problems many people don’t recognize? In a word, is your argument worth making?

2) Claims and Warrants: Were your claims clear and distinct from one another, and did they actually develop your thesis? Did your claims reflect a clear understanding of the theoretical text you used to support your ideas? Did your warrants demonstrate a clear use of logical inference to support your claims?

3) Evidence: Did you draw resourcefully and creatively from a variety of materials – read, observed, overheard, speculated or hypothesized – to support your claims? Or did you just repeat the same assertion again and again? Did the evidence you enlisted actually corroborate your claims, or is the relationship between your claims and evidence ambiguous or wholly arbitrary?

4) Organization: Did you use the expository form sensibly and flexibly as a means to help you generate and arrange your ideas for clarity of communication? Or, did you allow the expository form to become a straight jacket which hindered your thought and cramped your style, or did you jettison formality altogether and produce a loose and baggy argument?

5) Expression: Did you write in simple and clear sentences which conveyed your point accurately and persuasively, or did your language instead put up a barrier between yourself and your reader? Was your voice mature, relaxed and natural, or was it excessively formal and pompous or excessively flippant and vulgar? Was your use of vocabulary and phrasing precise or sloppy?