Criminology
Thomasfel_70
CRIM.docxYou must choose one and answer it in a minimum of 3 pages , 12-point font, double-spaced, and 1-inch margins on all sides.
The essay must be written on a graduate level. Students must be conscious of structure, organization, and mechanics of style. Students must use correct in-text citations in APA format and include a reference page with all cited sources in APA format.
In addition to the sources read for this course, you are to utilize an additional 2 scholarly sources to answer the question. Students may find and use additional citations from scholarly resources through the library or google scholar. A good place to check for additional readings is the Theory Reading List I have provided under Week 1 and Week 17.
All exams will be screened through Turnitin for similarities. The professor has the discretion to determine if the exam submitted contains copied work from previously written work or written work without citation which may result in failing. The same rubric that is used to grade the comprehensive exam will be used for this final exam. See below.
Scoring Rubric
Each student’s performance will be scored in five categories on a five point scale.
The minimum successful score will be “Competent” or better, with no score being “Unacceptable”.
|
|
Understanding of Questions |
Response to Questions |
Support |
Organization |
Language |
|
5 = Exemplary |
Responds incisively and directly to the questions asked. |
Responses to questions are specific, defendable, and complex. |
Provides substantial, well- chosen evidence (research or textual citations) used strategically. |
Responses contain appropriate, clear and adequate transitions between sentences and paragraphs. |
Apt and precise diction, syntactic variety, clear command of Standard English. |
|
4 = Strong |
Most responses are direct and relevant to the questions asked. |
Responses to question are more general, but still accurate; analyses go beyond the obvious. |
Provides sufficient and appropriate evidence and, makes effort to contextualize it. |
Responses contain distinct units of thought in paragraphs, coherently arranged; occasional weakness in transitions between sentences, paragraphs or thoughts. |
Some mechanical difficulties; occasional problematic word choices or awkward syntax errors; occasional grammar errors; some wordiness. |
|
3 = Competent |
Responds adequately to the questions asked; occasionally responds with unrelated information. |
Responses to questions are overly general and disorganized; may have some factual, interpretive, or conceptual errors. |
Provides some evidence but not always relevant, sufficient, or integrated into the response. |
Responses are uneven; paragraphs sometimes effective, but others are brief, weakly unified, or undeveloped; some awkward or missing transitions between thoughts. |
Occasional major grammar errors (e.g., agreement, tense); frequent minor grammar errors (e.g., prepositions, articles); occasional imprecise diction; awkward syntax; wordiness. |
|
2 = Marginal |
Confuses some significant concepts in the questions asked. |
Responses to questions are vague or irrelevant. |
Evidence usually only narrative or anecdotal; awkwardly or incorrectly incorporated. |
Repetitive, wanders. |
Frequent major and minor grammar problems; frequent imprecise diction; wordiness; awkward syntax; repetitive sentence patterns; problems impede meaning. |
|
1 = Unacceptable |
Does not understand questions and/or concepts. |
No discernable response to most questions given. |
Little or no evidence cited to support responses. |
Responses are arbitrary or not structured, illogical or not coherent. |
Numerous grammatical errors and stylistic problems; English overwhelmingly non- Standard; errors in every sentence |
