PCAT SCORING GUIDE

Score=6: OUTSTANDING

A 6 paper presents a cogent, well-articulated critique of the argument and demonstrates mastery of the elements of effective writing. A typical paper in this category:

 

  • clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them insightfully
  • develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically, and connects them with clear transitions
  • effectively supports the main points of the critique
  • demonstrates control of language, including diction and syntactic variety
  • demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English but may have minor flaws
Application

Score=5: STRONG

A 5 paper presents a well-developed critique of the argument and demonstrates good control of the elements of effective writing. A typical paper in this category:

  • clearly identifies important features of the argument and analyzes them in a generally thoughtful way
  • develops ideas clearly, organizes them logically, and connects them with appropriate transitions
  • sensibly supports the main points of the critique
  • demonstrates control of language, including diction and syntactic variety
  • demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English but may have occasional flaws

Score=4: ADEQUATE

A 4 paper presents a competent critique of the argument and demonstrates adequate control of the elements of writing. A typical paper in this category:

  • identifies and analyzes important features of the argument
  • develops and organizes ideas satisfactorily but may not connect them with transitions
  • supports the main points of the critique
  • demonstrates sufficient control of language to convey ideas with reasonable clarity generally follows the conventions of standard written English but may have flaws

Score=3: LIMITED

A 3 paper demonstrates some competence in analytical writing skills and in its control of the elements of writing but is plainly flawed. A typical paper in this category exhibits ONE OR MORE of the following characteristics:

  • does not identify or analyze most of the important features of the argument, although some analysis of the argument is present
  • mainly analyzes tangential or irrelevant matters, or reasons poorly
  • is limited in the logical development and organization of ideas
  • offers support of little relevance and value for points of the critique
  • does not convey meaning clearly
  • contains occasional major errors or frequent minor errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics

Score=2: SERIOUSLY FLAWED

A 2 paper demonstrates serious weaknesses in analytical writing skills. A typical paper in this category exhibits ONE OR MORE of the following characteristics:

  • does not present a critique based on logical analysis, but may instead present the writer's own views on the subject
  • does not develop ideas, or is disorganized and illogical
  • provides little, if any, relevant or reasonable support
  • has serious and frequent problems in the use of language and in sentence structure
  • contains numerous errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics that interfere with meaning

Score=1: FUNDAMENTALLY DEFICIENT

A 1 paper demonstrates fundamental deficiencies in analytical writing skills. A typical paper in this category exhibits MORE THAN ONE of the following characteristics:

  • provides little evidence of the ability to understand and analyze the argument
  • provides little evidence of the ability to develop an organized response
  • has severe and persistent errors in language and sentence structure
  • contains a pervasive pattern of errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics that results in incoherence