An 5 paper is excellent in nearly all respects:

• Ideas--A 5 paper is an interesting and sophisticated response to the topic. The central idea or thesis is clearly stated, worthy of development, and suitably specific; usually the thesis constitutes a thoughtful answer to a question worth asking. The paper recognizes the complexity of the topic or question, acknowledging contradictions, qualifications or limits of the thesis while sustaining logical development.
• Support--It uses evidence appropriately and effectively, providing sufficient and convincing support for its main ideas. It appropriately defines terms and limits its scope, and cites useful illustrative examples.
• Organization and Coherence--A 5 paper has a logical structure appropriate to the assignment. Usually, transitional sentences lead the reader from one idea to the next, and/or identify the logical relations between ideas and thesis. Paragraphs make clear points that support the main idea, and paragraphs demonstrate coherence and continuity.
• Style--A 5 paper shows a clear command of English prose, with words chosen for their precise meanings, and an appropriate level of specificity and sophistication. Sentence style fits the audience and purpose; sentences are varied, yet clearly structured and carefully focused--neither long and rambling nor short and choppy.
• Mechanics--A 5 paper contains few, if any, errors in spelling, punctuation, or grammar, and observes applicable conventions of format and citation.

• Ideas--A 4 paper has a clearly stated thesis that responds appropriately to the topic. It demonstrates understanding of the question, acknowledging the central idea's complexity or significance, but it may handle the ideas in a less sophisticated and effective way than a 5 paper does.
• Support--The 4 paper offers reasons for supporting the points it makes, using varied kinds of evidence, but the evidence may need further evaluation or qualification. Connections between main ideas and evidence may need some clarifying, and definition of terms may not be smoothly accomplished, but the logic is solid. Examples do support a thesis, but analytical development may be somewhat incomplete.
• Organization--The 4 paper demonstrates a logical progression of ideas, and offers the reader transitional links; each paragraph relates to the paper's central idea, but the connections may be less sophisticated and effective than those of the 5 paper. Sentences coherently support their paragraph's topic sentences.
• Style--The prose of a 4 paper is accurate and effective, but may sometimes be too general; sentences are mostly clear and well-structured, though there may be an occasional awkward or ineffective construction.
• Mechanics--A 4 paper may contain a few mechanical or grammatical errors, but they do not impede understanding; format and other considerations are substantially correct and appropriate.

• Ideas--The 3 paper responds to the topic, but presents its central idea in general terms, not striking an appropriate level of specificity and precision. The paper may not offer insights beyond the most obvious, and the thesis does not engage the topic's key questions with sufficient clarity and control. The paper may restate the question unnecessarily, or may overlook important aspects.
• Support--The 3 paper may exhibit only a basic comprehension of source material, with some lapses in understanding or meaning. Analysis may be simply quotation, not integrated into a flow of ideas, and the relevance of examples may not be clear. 3 papers often inappropriately depend on unsupported opinion or personal experience, or assume that the evidence speaks for itself; there may be lapses in logic and the development may be perfunctory.
• Organization--The 3 paper may list ideas or arrange them ineffectively rather than using a logical structure; transitions are likely to be sequential (first, second, third) rather than logical links. While each paragraph relates to the central idea, the flow of ideas may not be smooth, and arrangement of sentences may occasionally be ineffective.
• Style--The 3 paper usually exhibits some vague word choice or inappropriately general terms, and though sentence structure is generally correct there may be some sentences that are wordy or unfocused or choppy. Meaning may be diffused through cumbersome constructions.
• Mechanics--The 3 paper may contain some minor mechanical or grammatical errors, but they are not severe enough to impede understanding.

• Ideas--The paper does not have a clear central idea, or responds to the assignment in a simplistic or perfunctory way. The thesis may be vague or unrecognizable, may be too obvious to be developed effectively, or may demonstrate only a surface-level approach to the topic.
• Support--The 2 paper may show a misunderstanding of sources; it may depend on cliches or overgeneralizations for support, or may offer little evidence of any kind. The 2 paper's examples are not convincing: it may get lost in personal narrative, or it may simply summarize when analysis is required. Paragraphs may be too short to do justice to the topic.
• Organization--2 papers often have random organization, using few or inappropriate transitions; paragraphs may lack clear logical links to the central idea, and paragraph length may be inappropriate (long undivided blocks or choppy short units). 2 papers often contain paragraphs with little relevance to the topic, or whose relevance requires considerable authorial explanation.
• Style--A 2 paper may be overly vague and abstract, or overly personal and specific, but in any case its style is inadequate for the task at hand. It usually contains frequent awkward or ungrammatical sentences, or employs "correct" sentences that are inappropriately simple or monotonous.
• Mechanics--The mechanical and grammatical errors in a 2 paper are severe enough or frequent enough to impede a reader's understanding. Format may be inappropriate, or may indicate neglect or misreading of instructions.

• A paper may fail because its flaws exceed those allowed for 2 papers in any sub-category, including sentence-level competence; major and repeated deviations from accepted English usage and grammar may fail a paper.
• A paper may fail because it is off topic, of inappropriate length, or too full of logical or other flaws; moreover, papers that lean inappropriately hard on source material (with or without acknowledgment) also fail, as do papers whose coherence is detectable only to the writer.