Reading Response Rubric for Non-Traditional User Interfaces

Your reading responses are graded on both their content and their writing.  Responses are worth 8 points total, 2 points for writing and 6 points for content.  Use this guide to interpret my feedback on your responses.

Content

A. 1pt              Appropriate topic for analysis (well-focused, clear position, not overly negative (simply bashes the paper) or positive (too rah-rah)).

B. 2pts             Analysis topic clearly related to specific class topics (interface metaphors, evaluation, iterative design, etc)

                        0 = no relation to class topics
                        1 = superficial/tangential relation to class topics
                        2 = analysis centered around/strongly supported by class topics

C. 3pts             Quality of analysis

0 = no analysis present

1 = weak analysis: only shallow ideas from one or both papers included, or ideas from paper do not support analysis topic well

2 = intermediate analysis: deep ideas and specific examples from one paper included, ideas/examples moderately support the analysis topic

3 = strong analysis: deep ideas and specific examples from both papers included, ideas/examples make a clear case for analysis topic

Writing

D. 1pt              Organization

0 = No clear organization.  Thesis statement and topic sentences weak or missing.  Paragraphs do not adhere to topic.

0.5 = Weak organization.  Paragraphs generally address a single topic, but may wander.  Thesis sentence may be missing or weak.  Weak flow.

1 = Strong organization.  Clear flow, good structure.

E. 1pt              Writing style

0 = Multiple grammar/spelling mistakes.  Unnecessary wordiness.  Many sentence structure problems.

0.5 = Few grammar/spelling mistakes.  Some wordiness.  Few sentence structure problems.

1 = (Almost) No grammar/spelling errors.  Clear, concise writing.

 

 

 not overly negative (simply bashes the paper) or positive (too rah-rah)

 = Strong organization.  Clear flow, good structure.sis sentence may be missing or weak.le sis topicg spaces at HMC or other in