| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| NRS-493 | NRS-493-O500 | Literature Review | 60.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2: Less Than Satisfactory (75.00%) | 3: Satisfactory (79.00%) | 4: Good (89.00%) | 5: Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 80.0% |
| Literature Review | 10.0% | An introduction is not present. | An introduction is present, but it does not relate to the body of the paper. | An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. There is nothing in the introduction to entice the reader to continue reading. | An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. Information presented in the introduction provides incentive for the reader to continue reading. | An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. Information presented in the introduction is intriguing and encourages the reader to continue reading. | | 6.00/6.00 |
| Comparison of Research Questions | 20.0% | No comparison of research questions is presented. | A comparison of research questions is presented, but it is not valid. | A cursory though valid comparison of research questions is presented. | A moderately thorough and valid comparison of research questions is presented. | A reflective and insightful comparison of research questions is presented. | | 12.00/12.00 |
| Comparison of Sample Populations | 20.0% | No comparison of sample populations is presented. | A comparison of sample populations is presented, but it is not valid. | A cursory though valid comparison of sample populations is presented. | A moderately thorough and valid comparison of sample populations is presented. | A reflective and insightful comparison of sample populations is presented. | More developed on the other articles could have been included. | 9.48/12.00 |
| Comparison of the Limitations of the Study | 20.0% | No comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. | A comparison of the limitations of the study is presented, but it is not valid. | A cursory though valid comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. | A moderately thorough and valid comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. | A reflective and insightful comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. | This section could have been elaborated. | 9.48/12.00 |
| Conclusion and Recommendations for Further Research | 10.0% | No conclusion and recommendations for further research are presented. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are presented, but they are not valid. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are valid, but they are cursory. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are valid and moderately thorough. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are reflective and insightful. | | 6.00/6.00 |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 15.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 5.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | | 3.00/3.00 |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 5.0% | 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 progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | | 3.00/3.00 |
| Criteria 3Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | | 3.00/3.00 |
| Format | 5.0% |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 2.0% | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. | | 1.20/1.20 |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 3.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent 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. | | 1.80/1.80 |
| Total Weightage | 100% | | | | | | | | 54.96/60.0 |