This order has been set on revision status. Please press the "Confirm" button to tell us you are aware of this, and that you will complete it within the time provided.

Criteria

Exceptional� 5

Good� 4

Average� 3

Needs� work� 2

Poor� 1

I. Topic Overview and Introduction:���������������������������������� Does the paper introduce and clearly define/explain the purpose or topic of the literature review?����������� �����10%

The chosen review topic is clearly presented with a well thought-out, comprehensive overview of the topic provided..

The selected topic is well presented.� Acceptable overview of the topic is provided.�� .

The chosen topic is presented.� A potential body of literature is suggested, but it is not well organized

A review topic may be alluded to, though the nature and/or scope of the topic is not clearly defined.

No discernable review topic is introduced, nor is an organization for the review described.

II. Organization and Analysis of the Overall Body of Literature on the topic:������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� a. Streams of thought:� Sources reviewed are reasonably categorized as affiliated with at least two separate streams-of-thought (or theoretical 'camps')������ 15%

In addition to identifying most of the leading sources (and authors) published about the topic, the author (you, the student) clearly identifies at least two primary 'streams of thought" on the topic.

In addition identifying some of the leading sources published about the topic, the author (you, the student) mentions at least two of the primary 'streams of thought" on the topic.

A few of the leading sources published about the topic are mentioned. The author (you, the student) refers to least one valid 'streams of thought" on the topic.

One or two of the leading sources about the topic are alluded to. The author (you, the student) fails to address at least one valid 'streams of thought" on the topic.

The sources reviewed (if any) are primarily biased, unreliable web-sites of biased parties, and are not organized by theoretical camp

b. Agreement, disagreement and omissions: sources are discussed in terms of points of agreement, points of disagreement and� lack of attention (points of omission)���������������������� �5%

The review does an exceptional job of addressing potential points of agreement, points of disagreement, and points of omission to be observed in the relevant literature, comprehensively

The review does an acceptable job of addressing potential points of agreement, points of disagreement, and points of omission to be observed in the relevant literature, overall

The review attempts to address potential points of agreement, disagreement, and oversight to be observed in the relevant literature, in some cases better than most

The review fails to address significant agreements, disagreement, and/or omissions in the leading literature on the topic.

The review fails to discuss any agreements, disagreement or oversights in the literature on the topic.

III. Sources Reviewed were Chosen Carefully, and Represent a Comprehensive Selection of the Best, Most Reliable Literature on the topic:���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ��a. Selectivity:� Do the sources indicate that the author (the student) critically reflected on the relevance/ utility of each with respect to the topic?������������������������� 15%

The sources chosen for the review indicate that the author (the student) did an excellent job of critically reflecting on the relevance/ utility of each reviewed source with respect to the topic

The sources indicate that the author (the student) did a good job of critically reflecting on the relevance/ utility of each reviewed source with respect to the topic

The sources indicate that the author (the student) struggled to critically reflecting on the relevance/ utility of each reviewed source with respect to the topic

The sources are primarily biased, unreliable web-sites, and appear to have been randomly chosen as a result of an internet search.

Limited, if any, significant publications on the topic are reviewed randomly, not systematically.

b. Comprehensive representation:���������� Does the list of sources represent a comprehensive overview of the best, most reliable published literature on the topic, or does the chosen literature represent the random results of an internet search?��� ������������������������������������������������5%

The list of sources represent a high-quality, comprehensive overview of the best, most reliable published literature on the topic, with substantial critical reflection evident in the selection of sources for review

The list of sources represent a comprehensive overview of good, generally reliable published literature on the topic, with critical reflection evident in the selection of sources for review

The list of sources represent a overview of published literature on the topic, with limited critical reflection evident in the selection of sources for review

the chosen literature represent the random results of an internet search, and little-to-no critical reflection is evident regarding the sources chosen for review

Limited, if any, significant publications on the topic are reviewed randomly, with no critical reflection evident

IV. Critical, Systematic Evaluation of each Source:���������������������������������������������������������������� ������������a. Assumptions: The student is able to identify the essential assumptions that are fundamentally 'taken for granted' in arriving at the conclusions of a particular source?��������������������������������� 10%

For each source reviewed, the student is able to critically evaluate the essential assumptions that are fundamental to the arguments made by that source

For most of the sources reviewed, the student does a good job of trying to critically evaluate the fundamental assumptions of that source

For most of the sources reviewed, the student tries to identify the fundamental assumptions of that source

The student struggles to distinguish between the fundamental assumptions of a publication, the source's evidence and the findings/ conclusions of a source.

The student fails to identify any assumptions fundamental to the arguments of any source.

b. Logic:� Does the student identify, and critically evaluate, the causal logic of each source with respect to the source's analysis and findings?���������������������������������������������������� 10%

The student does an excellent job of identifying, and critically evaluating, the causal logic of most reviewed source with respect to the source's analysis and findings

The student does a commendable job of identifying, and critically evaluating, the causal logic of some reviewed source with respect to the source's analysis and findings

The student struggles to identify, and critically evaluating, any causal logic of most reviewed source with respect to the source's analysis and findings

The student fails to identify, or critically reflect on, any causal logic for the sources reviewed

The student appears NOT to be able to discern the causal logic underpinning the arguments of any published source on the topic

c. Evidence: Is the reliability AND validity of evidence cited by each source critically discussed?��������������������� 10%

The reliability AND validity of evidence, for most reviewed sources, is critically discussed

The reliability or validity of evidence, for at least a couple of the sources reviewed is discussed

The reliability or validity of evidence, for at least one of the sources reviewed is mentioned

No discussion of the reliability or validity of evidence is presented for any of the reviewed sources

No discussion of the reliability or validity of any evidence is presented

d. Methodology:� If any, is the methodology of any relevant sources critically identified and evaluated?���� �������5%�����������������

The methodology of some relevant sources is critically identified and evaluated

The methodology of some relevant sources is discussed

The methodology of any relevant source is acknowledged

Very few of the reviewed sources employ any type of scientific methodology in analysis of the topic

None of the reviewed sources employ anything close to a scientific methodology

V. Concluding, critical judgment: Does the review conclude with a critical appraisal of the overall state of the available published knowledge on the topic?��������������������������� 15%

The review conclude with an excellent critical appraisal of the overall state of� knowledge on the topic-- which validly represents the current state of AVAILABLE literature on the topic

The review conclude with a critical appraisal of the overall state of� knowledge on the topic-- which represents the current state of AVAILABLE literature on the topic

The review conclude with a general, unfocused overview of the sources reviewed for the paper on the topic

The review conclude with a unfocused repetition of a point (or several points) made earlier in the paper, with no critical judgment

No systematic, critical reflection on the current state of knowledge on the topic is presented