These papers looks good on the surface but are simplistic. They are poorly written on several counts and may opdn ap lit open essay rubric distracting errors in grammar and mechanics. These papers are not as thorough, precise, or aware of complexities as the top scoring papers. Two papers will paraphrase from the selection while the one essays omit any reference to the text.

These papers are less thorough, less perceptive or less specific than papers.

These essays are nonetheless not as well-conceived, organized, or developed as upper-half papers. These papers use appropriate choices for quotation or reference and select an appropriate number of choices ap lit open essay rubric throughout the passage. Although they may have attempted to answer the question, the views presented typically have little clarity or coherence.

Frequently, they are unacceptably brief. Part of the question may be omitted altogether. Papers with a score of 9 will sing while 8 papers are almost there with just a few flat notes.

They may deal with fewer narrative techniques, and analysis may be less perceptive or less developed than that of the better essays. The writing may convey the writer’s ideas, but it reveals weak control over such elements as diction, organization, syntax or grammar.

Although the writer may have made some effort ap lit open essay rubric answer the question, the views presented have little clarity or coherence. They usually demonstrate inconsistent control over the elements of composition app are not as well conceived, organized, or developed as the upper-half papers. Though perhaps not as thorough or precise in their discussion of how the speaker’s tone is revealed in the poem, their dependence on paraphrase, if any, should be in the service of analysis.


The meaning they deduce may be inaccurate or insubstantial and not clearly related to the question. These papers compound the weaknesses of essays in the range.

In their textual references they are ap lit open essay rubric and specific. Composition skills are at a level sufficient to convey the writer’s thoughts, and egregious mechanical errors do not constitute a distraction. Generally, 6 essays present a less sophisticated analysis and less consistent command of the elements of effective writing than essays scored 7.

Although they may be flawed, the papers, nevertheless, display consistent control over the elements of effective writing and reveal the students’ ability to read with perception and to express ideas with clarity and skill. Although adequate to convey the students’ thoughts, the writing is not as well conceived, organized or developed as that in papers scoring in the upper half. These essays respond to the question without important errors but miss the complexity of the passage.

These papers attempt to explain the passage but ap lit open essay rubric so inaccurately or ineffectively. The analysis may be partial, unconvincing, or irrelevant or it may rely essentially on paraphrase. Students respond correctly but do not devote enough space to arguments.

These essays compound the weakness of essays in the range and are frequently unacceptably brief. These essays are ap lit open essay rubric but with less maturity and control than the top papers.


Access Denied

Evidence from the text may be meager or misconstrued. They respond to the assigned ap lit open essay rubric yet probably say little beyond the most easily-grasped observations. These essays reflect a sound grasp of this poem; but they are less sensitive to the complexities than the best essays, and their interpretation of the poem may falter in some particulars.

Moreover, they seriously misread the passage or fail to respond adequately to the question.

AP Literature and Composition Rubric

Although the writers may provide a range of interpretations, these papers will offer a convincing rubriic of the poem as well as consistent control over the elements of effective composition, including ap lit open essay rubric language unique to the criticism of verse. Their analysis of HOW the author creates meaning may be vague, formulaic, or inadequately supported.

These papers adequately demonstrate an understanding of the passage. Choices of proof may be less effective than those in range or not from throughout the passage.