CRM J 4

Research Paper Rubric (100 Points Possible): Students will complete this assignment with attention to the criteria in the table below.

Exceptional corresponds to an A (95-100%): Performance is outstanding; significantly above the usual expectations. Proficient corresponds to a grade of B to A- (83-94%): Skills and standards are at the level of expectation. Basic corresponds to a C to B- (75-82%): Skills and standards are acceptable, but improvements are needed to meet expectations well. Novice corresponds to a D to C- (60%-74%): Performance is weak; the skills or standards are not sufficiently demonstrated at this time. Missing/NA corresponds to an F (0-59%): This criterion is missing or is not in evidence.

The instructor will compute an analytic score by assigning points for each criterion, following the percentages indicated above.

Criteria

Ratings (Levels)

Exceptional Proficient Basic Novice Missing/NA

Overview 20 points possible

The paper provides an exceptional foundational overview of the topic as it relates to criminal justice. (19-20 points)

The paper provides a foundational overview of the topic as it relates to criminal justice. (17-18 points)

The paper provides a foundational overview of the topic as it relates to criminal justice, but some improvements are needed. (15-16 points)

The paper provides a weak foundational overview of the topic as it relates to criminal justice; significant improvements are needed. (12-14 points)

The paper provides little to no evidence of a foundational overview of the topic as it relates to criminal justice. (0-11 points)

SLU Core Value Connection 20 points possible

The paper makes a strong connection between the selected topic and the core value of responsible stewardship, with outstanding analysis. (19-20 points)

The paper makes a connection between the selected topic and the core value of responsible stewardship, with appropriate analysis. (17-18 points)

The paper makes a connection between the selected topic and the core value of responsible stewardship, but the analysis needs some improvement. (15-16 points)

The paper makes a weak connection between the selected topic and the core value of responsible stewardship, and the analysis needs significant improvement. (12-14 points)

The paper makes little to no connection between the selected topic and the core value of responsible stewardship, and little to no analysis is evident. (0-11 points)

Content 20 points possible

The paper clearly identifies focus and masterfully analyzes and discusses the topic. (19-20 points)

The paper clearly identifies focus and logically analyzes and discusses the topic. (17-18 points)

The paper identifies focus and analyzes and discusses the topic, but some improvements are needed. (15-16 points)

The paper weakly identifies focus and analyzes and discusses the topic; significant improvements are needed. (12-14 points)

The paper shows little to no identification of focus and discussion of topic. (0-11 points)

Writing, Grammar, and Syntax 15 points possible

Writing, grammar, and syntax are significantly above expectations. (15 points)

Writing, grammar, and syntax are of an appropriate college level. (13-14 points)

Writing, grammar, and syntax are adequate, but some improvement is needed. (12 points)

Writing, grammar, and syntax are weak; significant improvement is needed. (9-11 points)

There is little to no evidence of college- level writing, grammar, and syntax. (0-8 points)

Format 15 points possible

Resources are complete and appropriately cited, and references use APA style with no errors. (24-25 points)

Resources are complete and appropriately cited, and references use APA style, but 1 or 2 minor errors are noted. (21-23 points)

Citations and references are acceptable, but some APA-format improvement is needed. (19-20 points)

Citations and references are weak; significant APA-format improvement is needed. (15-18 points)

There is little to no evidence of cited resources in APA format. (0-14 points)

Resources 10 points possible

The paper uses more than five acceptable sources, and sources were of optimal variety. (10 points)

The paper uses a minimum of five acceptable sources. (9 points)

The paper uses a minimum of five sources, but one source may be questionable. (8 points)

The paper uses three or four sources, and one or two sources may be questionable. (6-7 points)

The paper uses less than three sources, and one or all sources may be questionable. (0-5 points)