| |
1 Unsatisfactory 0.00% |
2 Less than Satisfactory 65.00% |
3 Satisfactory 75.00% |
4 Good 85.00% |
5 Excellent 100.00% |
| 70.0 %Content |
|
| 35.0 % Describe the benefits of working in a team during the research process. (Competency 4.3) |
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is missing. |
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is vague or incomplete. |
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is adequate and appropriate. |
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is clear and makes some connections to research. |
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is thorough and well-researched; makes connections to current research. |
|
| 35.0 % Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited your research. |
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is missing. |
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is vague or incomplete. |
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is adequate and appropriate. |
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is clear and thoughtful. |
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is thorough and concise. |
|
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness |
|
| 7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose |
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. |
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. |
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. |
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. |
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
|
| 8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction |
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. |
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. |
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. |
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. |
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
|
| 5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) |
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. |
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. |
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. |
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. |
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
|
| 10.0 %Format |
|
| 5.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) |
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. |
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. |
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. |
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. |
All format elements are correct. |
|
| 5.0 % Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) |
Sources are not documented. |
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. |
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. |
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. |
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
|
| 100 % Total Weight
|
|
