Interpretation deals with logic, analysis, and reasoning. The Ideas strand within Argument is comprehensive and evaluates the synthesis of ideas. The interpretation strand is much more specific to the paragraph level.

Analysis:
Analysis evaluates the discussion of evidence. At the lower level, is the interpretation accurate and focused? At higher level, students are expected to analyze thoughtfully, including subtle nuances while retaining clarity.

Justification:
Justification evaluates a student’s ability to develop a link from evidence to assertion. As readers and teachers, we often find that students almost prove their argument but fail to fully land on their point: this criterion addresses that logic gap.

There are two primary criteria that make up Contextualization:

Framing:
The framing criterion is the broader umbrella within contextualization. Framing occurs often occurs within the introduction, thesis statement, and around evidence. Does the author include only the basic frame (novel, historical event) or is their argument framed within the greater discourse of historical ideas and movements?

Content:
Context is more specific and concrete than framing; it refers to the background information around the evidence chunks. Does the author set up the reader with enough background information for the paragraphs to be read smoothly and cohesively?

Selection primarily evaluates evidence selection—relevance, persuasiveness, and concision. Included in this strand is evidence presentation—how smoothly is argument incorporated into the paragraph.

Choice:
When we evaluate choice, we are analyzing the type of evidence selected—is it pertinent, is it relevant, is it authoritative?

Presentation:
Evidence must be presented clearly within an essay; this criterion addresses the blending, chunking, and overall weaving of evidence into an argument.