Abnormal Psychology Research

Abnormal Psychology Research Paper Rough Draft - Rubric

Abnormal Psychology Research Paper Rough Draft - Rubric

Explanation of Selected Subject

22.5 points

Criteria Description

Provide a comprehensive explanation of the selected subject (clinical definition, background information).

5. Target

22.5 points

Explanation of the selected subject is clear, comprehensive, and insightful. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are integrated to support claims.

4. Acceptable

19.13 points

Explanation of the selected subject is clear, appropriate, and thorough. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are used to support in a well-connected way.

3. Approaching

16.88 points

Explanation of the selected subject is appropriate and relevant but is missing some important details or lacks clarity.

2. Insufficient

14.63 points

Explanation of the selected subject is vague or inappropriate.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of the selected subject is missing.

Explanation of the Societal and/or Cultural Implications

22.5 points

Criteria Description

Address the societal and/or cultural implications of the chosen subject.

5. Target

22.5 points

Explanation of the societal and/or cultural implications of the chosen subject is clear, comprehensive, and insightful. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are integrated to support claims.

4. Acceptable

19.13 points

Explanation of the societal and/or cultural implications of the chosen subject is clear and thorough. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are used to support in a well-connected way.

3. Approaching

16.88 points

Explanation of the societal and/or cultural implications of the chosen subject is appropriate and relevant but is missing some important details or lacks clarity. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are used to support in a loosely connected way.

2. Insufficient

14.63 points

Explanation of the societal and/or cultural implications of the chosen subject is vague or inappropriate. No scholarly or credible sources are given as support.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of the societal and/or cultural implications of the chosen subject is missing.

Models of Abnormality

18 points

Criteria Description

Discuss how the subject is related to one or more models of abnormality as discussed in Chapter 3 of the textbook.

5. Target

18 points

Explanation of how the subject is related to one or more models of abnormality is clear, comprehensive, and insightful. Exceptional details are provided. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are integrated to support claims.

4. Acceptable

15.3 points

Explanation of how the subject is related to one or more models of abnormality is clear and thorough. Strong details are provided. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are used to support in a well-connected way.

3. Approaching

13.5 points

Explanation of how the subject is related to one or more models of abnormality is appropriate and relevant but is missing some important details or lacks clarity. Relevant scholarly and credible sources are used to support in a loosely connected way.

2. Insufficient

11.7 points

Explanation of how the subject is related to one or more models of abnormality is vague or inappropriate. No scholarly or credible sources are given as support.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of how the subject is related to one or more models of abnormality is missing.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

4.5 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target

4.5 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable

3.82 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching

3.38 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

2. Insufficient

2.93 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little awareness of the intended audience.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

4.5 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

5. Target

4.5 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable

3.82 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. Approaching

3.38 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient

2.93 points

Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear and not supported by the overall development of the purpose.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Mechanics of Writing

4.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target

4.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable

3.82 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

3. Approaching

3.38 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient

2.93 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Paper Format

4.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes use of appropriate style for the major and assignment.

5. Target

4.5 points

All format elements are correct.

4. Acceptable

3.82 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. Approaching

3.38 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. Insufficient

2.93 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Research Citations

4.5 points

Criteria Description

Includes in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style.

5. Target

4.5 points

In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.

4. Acceptable

3.82 points

Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

3. Approaching

3.38 points

Reference page is included, and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

2. Insufficient

2.93 points

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Format/Documentation

4.5 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target

4.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable

3.82 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching

3.38 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2. Insufficient

2.93 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 90 points