Analysis of Student 1's WA1 and WA2, MUS 211 Fall 2015



thesis statement                                     doesn't address prompt (D or F)

evidence                                                   broad points that don't support thesis (C)

content from music theory                  discusses some musical details with limited technical vocabulary (C)

organization                                            clear but not compelling intro or conclusion (C)

mechanics                                                           clear (B)




thesis statement                                      clear, original, addresses prompt (A)

evidence                                                    lots of detailed evidence that supports argument (A)

content from music theory                  detailed discussion of musical features with technical vocabulary (A)

organization                                            logical flow and exceptional conclusion  (A)

mechanics                                                clear and complex (A)


This assignment also had an extra feature not in the rubric: a discussion of analytical ambiguity, and an evaluation of options. This is higher-order, even expert-level, thinking that I was pleasantly surprised to see.