|
Rubric
|
|
|
Excellent (4 pts)
|
Acceptable (3 pts)
|
Needs Improvement (2 pts)
|
Poor (1 pt)
|
|
Description/Critical Analysis of Research
Environment (1, 20%)
|
•Research environment is clearly described and critically analyzed in great depth. Primary research question stated.
|
•Research environment is described and critically analyzed. Primary research question stated.
|
•Research environment is somewhat described with minimal critical analysis. Primary research question stated, but needs revision.
|
• Research environment is not clearly described with little or no critical analysis. No primary research question stated.
|
|
Paper Format/Sections Included (1, 20%)
|
•2-3 pages with APA-Style used correctly • Concise and clear paper that includes assigned format: List facts, describes/critically analyzes research environment, identifies various areas of possible research, uses references
|
•1-2 pages with writing clear and readable.• Includes assigned format: List facts, describes/critically analyzes research environment, identifies various areas of possible research, uses references
|
•1 page with some APA-Style formatting errors. • Includes majority of assigned format, uses minimal references.
|
•1 page with writing style ambiguous or verbose. APA-Style not followed/assigned format not followed.
|
|
Quality of Local and Global Perspectives (1, 20%)
|
• Description of research environment /possible research areas from participatory worldview.
• Clearly stated problem(s) with analysis of local and global issues.
• Inclusion of impact on internal and external stakeholders.
|
• Description of research environment/possible research areas includes organizational viewpoint.
• Immediate systemic contextual factors included.
• Clearly stated problem with analysis of organizational issues.
• Inclusion of impact on stakeholders internal to organization only.
|
• Description of research environment/possible research areas includes peers’ viewpoints.
• Some contextual factors included. Inclusion of immediate participants only.
• Statement of issues includes peers’ perspectives.
|
• Description of research environment/possible research areas from egocentric viewpoint.
• Issues identified from personal perspective only.
• Narrow view of participants.
|
|
Literature Review (1, 20%)
|
• Comprehensive literature review included. 5 references using APA guidelines – utilizes current, scholarly references
|
• Literature review included with 5 references using APA guidelines. Majority of references are current and from current, scholarly references
|
• Incomplete or weak literature review. References are not all current or from acceptable references
|
• No or little literature review included; less than 5 references, APA guidelines not followed, references not acceptable
|
|
Terminology of Discipline Applied/Writing Quality (1, 20%)
|
• Uses course and professional terminology in appropriate contexts. • Writing focused on the issue and represents a high level of scholarly writing.
|
• Uses course and professional terminology in appropriate contexts. • Writing focused on the issue and well written in standard English.
|
• Uses course and professional terminology in inappropriate contexts. • Writing not concise and difficult to follow.
|
• Uses course terminology rarely. Writing contains many grammatical errors and does not communicate the issue.
|