Criminological Theories
CRJ 560 Exam Rubric
This rubric will be used to score each question on the midterm and final exams.
27 points per response (Total Points Possible = 135) (Convert final score to a percentage grade)
|
Criteria |
Excellent |
Good |
Fair |
Poor |
|
Response Relevance |
Addresses the question posed throughout the response |
Minor deviation from the focus of the question posed |
Substantial deviation from the focus of the question posed |
Response fails to address the question posed |
|
Conceptual Mastery |
Response identifies and discusses concepts in a way that demonstrates mastery of the material; author explains theoretical concepts in his or her words |
Response identifies and discusses concepts in a way that demonstrates proficiency in understanding and applying the material; the response explains concepts in most cases, but only identifies a concept in one case; author explains most concepts in his or her words |
Response indicates that the author has minimal understanding or ability to apply theoretical concepts, as the response identifies concepts, but provides minimal explanation of them; author explains a few concepts in his or her words, but not most |
Response indicates that the author lacks understanding of or an ability to apply theoretical concepts, such that the response identifies concepts but fails to explain or apply them or the author fails to identify concepts; author relies heavily on quotes to explain concepts, thus failing to demonstrate mastery of the material |
|
Thoroughness of Response |
Response addresses all components of what constitutes a good response |
Response addresses most components of what constitutes a good response |
Response addresses few components of what constitutes a good response |
Response fails to address the requirements for a good response |
|
Integration of Sources |
The author does an excellent job of integrating sources in a way that provides clear, accurate, and well-developed support for the ideas presented |
The author integrates sources well, but fails to support one or two assertions adequately |
The author provides sources for the assertions made, but their integration is weak, as they do not adequately support most assertions |
The author provides poor integration of sources such that few assertions, if any, are adequately supported |
|
Source Types |
All sources used meet the source restrictions |
Most sources used meet the source restrictions (i.e., > 50%) |
Some sources, but not most, meet the source restrictions |
No sources meet the source restrictions |
|
Organization |
Logical sequencing of ideas through well-developed paragraphs that connect to topic sentences and each other in the paragraph in which they fall, and regarding the focus of the question; responses are structured in the order defining what constitutes a good response |
For the most part, the response demonstrates logical sequencing of ideas, but some transitions are weak between paragraphs, within paragraphs, and in relation to the focus of the question; responses largely follow the structure of what constitutes a good response, but deviates in one area |
Significant disjointedness appears in transitions internal to and between paragraphs, which affect coherence. The paper shows limited connection to the focus of the question; only marginally structures the response in the order of what constitutes a good response |
No clear organization of ideas; fails to structure the response in the order of what constitutes a good response |
|
Mechanics and Style |
Mechanics and style errors are absent or so minimal that they do not affect the clarity of the author's ideas. Extensive proofreading and editing is evident. |
Mechanics and style errors appear occasionally, but they do not disrupt the overall clarity of the author's ideas. A moderate level of proofreading and editing is present. |
Mechanics and style errors are frequent and cause the reader to have to reread part of the author's work. However, while it is a struggle to grasp the author's ideas it is not impossible to ascertain most, if not all, of the author's ideas. Minimal evidence of proofreading and editing is present. |
Mechanics errors are extensive and impair the reader's ability to understand the author's ideas. Evidence of proofreading and editing is absent. |
|
Citations |
Correctly cites all sources in the text and in the references in APA format |
Correctly cites most sources in the text and in the references in APA format (i.e., > 50% in each area) |
Correctly cites some of the sources in the text and in the references in APA format, but not most |
Cites none of the sources in the text and in the reference list in APA format |
|
Format |
Meets all formatting requirements for the exam |
Meets most formatting requirements for the exam |
Meets some formatting requirements for the exam |
Meets none of the formatting requirements for the exam |