AP Essay Rubric/Active Reading Notes

 Question 1
(Li-Young Lee’s “A Story”)

• Score reflects the quality of the essay as a whole — its content, style, and mechanics. 
• The score for an exceptionally well-written essay may be raised by 1 point
• No poorly written essay be scored higher than a 3. 

9–8

• Essays offer a persuasive analysis of Lee’s use of literary devices to develop the complex relationship of the father and son.
• Provide convincing readings of both the complex relationship and Lee’s use of literary devices. 
• Consistent and effective control over the elements of composition .  
• Not error-free
• Clear and sophisticated

7–6

• Essays offer a reasonable analysis of Lee’s use of literary devices to develop the complex relationship of the father and son. 
• Less thorough or less precise in their discussion of the relationship and Lee’s use of literary devices 
• These essays demonstrate the student’s ability to express ideas clearly, making references to the text 

5

• Essays respond to the assigned task with a plausible reading of Lee’s use of literary devices to develop the relationship of the father and son 
• Tend to be superficial in their analysis of the relationship. 
• Paraphrase, which may contain some analysis, implicit or explicit. 
• Their analysis of the relationship of the father and son or of Lee’s use of literary devices may be vague
•  There may be minor misinterpretations of the poem

4–3

•   These lower-half essays fail to offer an adequate analysis of the poem. 
• The analysis may be partial or ignore the complexity of the relationship of the father and son or Lee’s use of literary devices. 
• Evidence from the poem may be slight. 
• The writing often demonstrates a lack of control over the conventions of composition: inadequate development of ideas, accumulation of errors

2–1

•   These essays compound the weaknesses of those in the 4–3 range. Although some attempt has been made to respond to the prompt. 
• These essays may contain serious errors in grammar and mechanics. They may offer a complete misreading or be unacceptably brief.  

0

•   These essays do no more than make a reference to the task. 

—

•   These essays are either left blank or are completely off topic.  

Question 2
(George Eliot’s Middlemarch)

 9–8

•  Essays offer a persuasive analysis of Eliot’s portrayal of the two characters and their complex relationship as husband and wife
• They consider literary devices such as narrative perspective and selection of detail, and they engage  the text through apt and specific references.

7–6

•  These essays offer a reasonable analysis of Eliot’s portrayal of the two characters and their complex relationship as husband and wife as Eliot develops these through literary devices. 
• They provide a sustained, competent reading of the passage, with attention to devices such as narrative perspective and selection of detail.

5

•  These essays respond to the assigned task with a plausible reading of the passage but tend to be superficial or thinly developed in their treatment of Eliot’s portrayal of the two characters .

4–3

• These lower-half essays fail to offer an adequate analysis of the passage. 
• The analysis may be partial, unconvincing, or irrelevant; the responses may ignore the complex relationship 
• These essays may be characterized by an unfocused or repetitive presentation of ideas, an absence of textual support, or an accumulation of errors.

2–1

• They may persistently misread the passage or be unacceptably brief. 
• They may contain pervasive errors that interfere with understanding.

 Question 3
(Justice) 


9–8

•  These essays offer a well-focused and persuasive analysis of a literary character’s understanding of justice 
• Using apt and specific textual support.

7–6

•  These essays offer a reasonable analysis of a literary character’s understanding of justice
• They analyze how the character responds in a significant way to justice or injustice. Although these responses have insight and understanding, their analysis is less thorough

5

•  These essays respond to the assigned task with a plausible reading, but they tend to be superficial or thinly developed in analysis. 
• They often rely upon plot summary that contains some analysis, implicit or explicit. 
• Simplistic understanding of the character or the idea of justice in the work, and support from the text may be too general.

4–3

•  These lower-half essays fail to offer an adequate analysis of a character’s understanding of and search for justice in a novel or play. 
• The analysis may be partial, unsupported, or irrelevant
• They may not develop an analysis of the significance of the search for justice for the work as a whole, or they may rely on plot summary alone.

2–1

• Although these essays make some attempt to respond to the prompt, they compound the weaknesses of those in the 4–3 range.
•  Often, they are unacceptably brief or are incoherent in presenting their ideas. They may be poorly written on several counts and contain distracting errors in grammar and mechanics.