| CON 210 Module 6 Research Paper Draft Rubric |
| ECON 210 Module 6 Research Paper Draft Rubric |
| Criteria | Ratings | | | | Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFocus - Application of Economic Theory | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 3 pts | 10 pts |
| | Paper makes great use applying economic theory to the topic (explaining the economics in the issue), includes economically logical conclusions, student excels at predicting future economic trends, events or conclusions based on the reasoning used. | Paper makes good use applying economic theory to the topic (explaining the economics in the issue), may include basic economically logical conclusions/projections. | Paper incorporates economic theory in explaining the topic (explaining the economics in the issue.) Little more than stating the economic theory is included. No use of economically logical conclusions. | Paper makes no application of economic theory to the topic. Is just descriptive of the topic in nature. Provides no evidence student connected economic theory to topic. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclusion of Course Learning Outcomes | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 3 pts | 10 pts |
| | Paper makes great use of course material, readings, and supplements. Easily maps to a number of learning outcomes in the syllabus. | Paper makes good use of course material and readings. Little outside supplements are included. Maps to a number of learning outcomes in the syllabus. | Paper makes basic use of course material. Typically no outside supplements or research in included. Difficult to map to a number of learning outcomes in the syllabus. | Paper makes no real constructive use of course material. One could consider this an opinion paper with no real supporting material. Difficult to map to a number of learning outcomes in the syllabus. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclusion of Supporting Data | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 3 pts | 10 pts |
| | Paper contains evidence of solid research effort drawing from many strong academic sources. | Paper contains evidence of medium research effort in number and strength of resources. | Paper contains evidence of minimal research effort or success drawing from few or weak sources (Wikipedia). | Paper contains evidence of no real research effort including no real source of research. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse of Statistical Evidence | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 0 pts | 10 pts |
| | Paper makes exemplary use of credible statistical evidence. | Paper makes good use of credible statistical evidence. | Statistical evidence is partial, weak or inappropriate. | No statistical evidence is presented. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStrength of Argumentation | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 3 pts | 10 pts |
| | Thesis is well developed and supported, feeds conclusion. Contradictory views plausibly handled. | Thesis is adequately developed and supported, only partially supports the conclusion. Contradictory views not treated adequately. | Thesis is not adequately developed and logically supported, conclusion not supported. Contradictory views not treated. | Thesis is not developed or supported. Conclusion missing or not supported. Contradictory views not treated adequately. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferences | 15 pts | 12 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 15 pts |
| | References are well documented in both the body and reference section in a consistent form. Many more than the minimum number of sources. | References are inconsistently documented in body and reference section. References are not ideally matched to content. Five sources and at least three journals contained. | References are poorly documented in body and reference section. References not appropriate to content or not current. Less than minimum requirements. | Almost no references documented. Inappropriate references. Fewer than five sources or fewer than three journal articles. Reliance on nonquality web sources. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 2 pts | 10 pts |
| | Writing is grammatically correct, clear and flowing. | Writing should be polished for stronger presentation. | Writing needs work for clarity, organization and grammatical presentation. | Clear indication that this is a draft with serious need for review and editing. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpelling | 5 pts | 4 pts | 2 pts | 0 pts | 5 pts |
| | No spelling errors that distract the reader from the content. | Less than 1% of word total have errors in spelling that distract the reader from content. | Frequent (3-4%) spelling errors that distract the reader from content. | Significantly more than 4% spelling errors that distract the reader from the content. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFlow of Thesis and Arguments | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 3 pts | 10 pts |
| | Organization is logical and easy to follow. Includes introductory overview and supportable conclusion. | Organization is evident but could be strengthened. | Organization is weak. Introduction and conclusion are not clearly delineated in body of work. | Organization is almost nonexistent and represents just a free flow of ideas. |
| This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Format | 10 pts | 8 pts | 5 pts | 0 pts | 10 pts |
| | APA style is employed perfectly. | Few errors in APA style and most are inconsequential. | Many features of APA style are ignored. | APA style ignored completely. |
| Total Points: 100 |
RODUBYA
draftrubric.xlsx
