An engineering student writes a lab report. It's clear, well-organized, and technically accurate. But it reads like a manual, with no sense of argument or narrative flow. By a traditional English rubric, it might score lower. By a technical writing rubric, it's excellent. The difference is recognizing what good writing looks like in different disciplines.

STEM writing has its own standards. A chemistry lab report that's vague but eloquent isn't good writing. A chemistry lab report that's precise and clear is. Assessing technical writing requires rubrics that value different things than humanities rubrics do.

What Technical Writing Values

• Precision over eloquence. A sentence that's less beautiful but more accurate is better than a beautiful sentence that's ambiguous.
• Clarity over style. Voice and flourish are secondary to making sure the reader understands exactly what you're saying.
• Accuracy over completeness. A concise, accurate report is better than a longer one that includes errors.
• Logical structure over narrative flow. In a lab report, the structure serves the purpose (methods, results, discussion), not literary effect.
• Appropriate audience awareness. Are you writing for specialists or for people outside the field? The appropriate level of jargon and explanation changes.

Building a Technical Writing Rubric

A rubric for technical writing might have criteria like: 'Clearly states the purpose, methods, and results,' 'Uses accurate scientific terminology,' 'Explains procedures in sufficient detail for replication,' 'Presents data clearly in tables/figures,' 'Draws conclusions supported by evidence.' Notice none of these mention eloquence, voice, or narrative arc.

Each criterion should define what accuracy, clarity, and appropriate audience awareness look like at different performance levels. A 4 might be 'Precisely defines all terms and explains concepts in a way that's accessible to someone unfamiliar with the field.' A 2 might be 'Uses some jargon without explanation or oversimplifies to the point of inaccuracy.'

Adapting General Writing Rubrics for Technical Contexts

If your school uses a general writing rubric across disciplines, you can adapt it for STEM. Weight precision and clarity more heavily than style and voice. Adjust criteria language to reflect disciplinary standards. A high score on 'organization' in a lab report means having clear sections with appropriate headers, not following a narrative arc.

You might keep some criteria universal (grammar, mechanics) while disciplining others (organization, argument) to fit the discipline. This allows some consistency across the school while recognizing disciplinary differences.

Teaching Students What Technical Writing Looks Like

Students often bring humanities writing habits to STEM writing. They try to create narrative tension in a lab report or add flowery descriptions to a technical explanation. They think good writing is good writing regardless of context. You have to teach them that writing is disciplinary. A sentence that's wonderful in a literary essay might be wrong in a technical report.

Share exemplars of good technical writing in your field. Show students published lab reports, engineering documentation, research papers. Help them see what excellence looks like in your discipline, not just in English class.

Using GraideMind for Technical Writing Assessment

GraideMind works with any rubric, including technical writing rubrics. Create your discipline-specific rubric, upload your assignment, and GraideMind evaluates technical clarity, accuracy of terminology, and organization according to your standards. You still add judgment about whether explanations are at the right level for your intended audience—that requires disciplinary expertise. But the systematic evaluation of clarity and precision is consistent.