Ask most political theory instructors what separates a good paper from an average one, and they will say that good papers interpret while average ones summarize. The difficulty is that this distinction is hard to put into words that students can act on. A rubric that says only "shows analysis" leaves both graders and students guessing. Writing descriptors that capture the difference is among the most valuable things you can do for your assignments.

Summary reports what a text says, while interpretation makes a claim about what the text means, why it argues what it does, or how its parts fit together. A summary of Book I of The Social Contract might state that Rousseau begins with the problem of finding a form of association that protects each member. An interpretation might argue that this opening problem reveals a tension in his account of freedom. The second moves beyond the text to make a judgment.

Descriptors should capture observable features of the writing rather than abstract qualities. Instead of saying that an excellent paper demonstrates deep understanding, say that it identifies a tension or ambiguity in the text and argues for a particular resolution. Instead of saying that a weak paper lacks analysis, say that it restates the author's claims in sequence without evaluating them. Observable features are easier to score and discuss.

Building descriptors from real student work

The best way to write descriptors is to read a set of past papers and notice what distinguishes the strong ones. Collect examples of summarizing sentences and interpretive sentences and look for patterns in their wording. You may find that interpretive sentences use verbs such as argues, implies, or reveals, while summarizing sentences use says, states, or describes. These patterns can inform your language.

• Summary level: restates the author's claims in order without commentary
• Developing level: adds occasional comments but does not sustain an argument
• Proficient level: makes a clear claim about the text and supports it with evidence
• Advanced level: identifies a tension or implication and argues for a resolution
• Exemplary level: anticipates objections and refines the claim in response

Teaching the distinction to students

Students need explicit practice distinguishing summary from interpretation. Give them a short paragraph about a passage from The Social Contract and ask them to mark each sentence as summary or interpretation. Then discuss why they classified it that way and how to turn a summarizing sentence into an interpretive one. This exercise makes the rubric language concrete and gives them a tool for editing their own drafts.

Revision prompts can reinforce the lesson. Ask students to highlight every sentence in their draft that only restates the text and consider whether it can be replaced with a claim about the text. Many will discover that large portions of their papers are summary. Reworking them leads to stronger writing and a better understanding of the material.

Applying the descriptors consistently

Even good descriptors require calibration. Have multiple graders score sample papers and compare their reasoning, paying attention to cases where one grader sees interpretation and another sees summary. These discussions usually lead to improvements in the language. They also help graders internalize the same standard.

AI-assisted grading tools can support consistency by applying descriptors the same way to every paper, though the descriptors need to be specific for the tool to work well. Test the tool on papers you have already graded and compare the results. If it confuses summary with interpretation, refine the rubric language until it matches your judgment. This process often reveals ambiguities in your own wording.

Keeping descriptors current

Descriptors should evolve as you learn from student work. If you notice a new pattern, such as students who treat historical context as interpretation, add language to address it. Revisit the rubric at the end of each term and note which criteria caused disagreement or confusion. Small revisions each term add up to a sharper tool.

Share updated rubrics with colleagues who teach similar courses, since the summary versus interpretation problem is common across the humanities. Their feedback may improve your wording and encourage a shared vocabulary within the department. Consistency across courses helps students recognize expectations as they progress. A well-crafted descriptor becomes a durable teaching asset.