EXPERIENTIAL ESSAY Purpose The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate an understanding of writing fundamentals and application of APA 6th ed. Guidelines.

essayrubric.html

Home >Government homework help > EXPERIENTIAL ESSAY Purpose The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate an understanding of writing fundamentals and application of APA 6th ed. Guidelines.

Rubric Detail

A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor linked a rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.

Content

Name: Essay Rubric Update

	Unacceptable	Inadequate	Developing	Proficient	Skilled	Exceptional
Title Page	Points: 0 (0%) None present. Feedback:	Points: .01 (1%) Title page included with all necessary components and has four or more errors. Feedback:	Points: .02 (2%) Title page included with all necessary components, with three errors Feedback:	Points: .03 (3%) Title page included with all necessary components. Two errors Feedback:	Points: .04 (4%) Title page included with all necessary components. One error Feedback:	Points: .05 (5%) All components present, error free and correctly formatted. Feedback:
Abstract Page	Points: 0 (0%) None present. Feedback:	Points: .02 (2%) Unclear, contains irrelevant information, length of abstract is too short (less than 150 words in length) Feedback:	Points: .04 (4%) Abstract page is included but missing information. Abstract paragraph is not properly formatted. Feedback:	Points: .06 (6%) Abstract paragraph includes all necessary components, with the exception of drawing a conclusion about the implications of the project. Paragraph is correctly formatted. Feedback:	Points: .08 (8%) . Author describes main idea & purpose of project in an organized, specific and concise manner. Identifies method(s) used to support thesis or answer research question. Provides explanation of what was expected, discovered, accomplished, collected, produced. Clearly states how work advances knowledge in the discipline, why it is important or how it can be used. Abstract paragraph is not correctly formatted. Feedback:	Points: .1 (10%) Author describes main idea & purpose of project in an organized, specific and concise manner. Identifies method(s) used to support thesis or answer research question. Provides explanation of what was expected, discovered, accomplished, collected, produced. Clearly states how work advances knowledge in the discipline, why it is important or how it can be used. Abstract paragraph is correctly formatted. Feedback:
Ideas, Support & Development (Content)	Points: 0 (0%) Clear absence of support for main points. Did not meet the minimum page requirement of four (4) full pages (not including title, abstract, and reference page) Feedback:	Points: .04 (4%) Lack of support for main points; frequent and illogical generalizationswithout support. Feedback:	Points: .08 (8%) Insufficient, non-specific, and/or irrelevant support Feedback:	Points: .12 (12%) Main points and ideas are only indirectly supported; support isn't sufficient or specific, but is loosely relevant to main points Feedback:	Points: .16 (16%) Ideas supported sufficiently; support is sound, valid and logical Feedback:	Points: .2 (20%) Consistent evident with originality and depth of ideas; ideas work together as a unified whole; main points are sufficiently supported (with evidence); support is valid and specific Feedback:
Sentence Structure	Points: 0 (0%) Unable to write simple sentences. Contains 13 or more errors in sentence structure. Feedback:	Points: .03 (3%) Simple sentences used; errors with sentence structure. 10-12 errors in sentence structure. Feedback:	Points: .06 (6%) Sentences show errors of structure; little or no variety (use of simple and compound sentences); no grasp of sentence flow. 7-9 errors in sentence structure Feedback:	Points: .09 (9%) Formulaic or repetitive sentence patterns; shows errors in sentence construction; non-standard syntax usage. 4-6 errors in sentence structure Feedback:	Points: .12 (12%) Effective sentence, varied (simple and compound sentences). 1-3 errors in sentence structure Feedback:	Points: .15 (15%) Each sentence structured effectively, powerfully; rich, well-chosen variety of sentence styles and length. Free of sentence structure errors. Feedback:
Paragraph Structure/Organization	Points: 0 (0%) Paragraph structure does not exist; or is a single rambling paragraph or series of isolated paragraphs Feedback:	Points: .04 (4%) Organization, if evident at all, is confusing and disjointedly paragraph structure is weak; transitions are missing, inappropriate and/or illogical Feedback:	Points: .08 (8%) Paragraphs were simple, disconnected and formulaic. No evident transitions or planned sequence. Feedback:	Points: .12 (12%) Limited attempts to organize around a thesis; paragraphs are mostly stand-alone with weak or non-evident transitions Feedback:	Points: .16 (16%) Competent organization and paragraph structure; lacking in effective transitions Feedback:	Points: .2 (20%) Organization is sequential and appropriate to assignment; paragraphs are well developed and appropriately divided; ideas linked with smooth and effective transitions Feedback:
In-Text Citations	Points: 0 (0%) More than 30% cited work and/or plagiarism/matching. Feedback:	Points: .03 (3%) Zero in-text citations used throughout document. Feedback:	Points: .06 (6%) One or two APA style in-text citations used throughout document. Provides very little and/or unrelated evidence to support opinion. Feedback:	Points: .09 (9%) Three APA style in-text citations used in the document. Evidence from text provides some explanation/analysis to support opinion. Feedback:	Points: .12 (12%) Four or five APA style in-text citations used throughout document with improper in-text citation formatting. Evidence from text provides clear explanation/analysis to support opinion. Feedback:	Points: .15 (15%) Five APA style in-text citations used throughout document. In-text citations are in proper format. Evidence from text provides insightful explanation/analysis to support opinion. Feedback:
APA References Page	Points: 0 (0%) Reference page contains no Army doctrine resources, only internet webpages or no reference page. Feedback:	Points: .01 (1%) References page contains one scholarly academic and no Army doctrine resource. Many errors with application of APA guidelines. Feedback:	Points: .02 (2%) Reference page contains: two scholarly academic resource, text reference and Army doctrine resource. Follows most APA guidelines. Feedback:	Points: .03 (3%) Reference page contains three scholarly academic, Army doctrine references and text. Minor errors with application of APA guidelines. Feedback:	Points: .04 (4%) Reference page contains four required scholarly academic, Army doctrine references and text. Minor errors with application of APA guidelines. Feedback:	Points: .05 (5%) Reference page contains four required scholarly academic, Army doctrine references and text. Follows all APA guidelines. Feedback:
Mechanics and Presentation	Points: 0 (0%) Errors in spelling and capitalization; intrusive and /or inaccurate punctuation, communication is hindered. 13 or more spelling, capitalization and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: .02 (2%) Contains errors of punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization; errors severely interferes with meaning. Formatting weak. 10-12 spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: .04 (4%) Contains errors of punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization. Errors interfere with understanding the meaning of the sentence. 7-9 spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: .06 (6%) Contains punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization errors. Errors in formatting or formatting is inconsistent. 4-6 spelling, capitalization and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: .08 (8%) Contains only occasional punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization errors. Few formatting errors. Most errors likely careless. 1-3 spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Feedback:	Points: .1 (10%) Free of punctuation, spelling, capitalization errors; appropriate format and presentation for assignment. Feedback:

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

Title Page--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points None present. Inadequate .01 (1%) points Title page included with all necessary components and has four or more errors. Developing .02 (2%) points Title page included with all necessary components, with three errors Proficient .03 (3%) points Title page included with all necessary components. Two errors Skilled .04 (4%) points Title page included with all necessary components. One error Exceptional .05 (5%) points All components present, error free and correctly formatted. Feedback:

Abstract Page--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points None present. Inadequate .02 (2%) points Unclear, contains irrelevant information, length of abstract is too short (less than 150 words in length) Developing .04 (4%) points Abstract page is included but missing information. Abstract paragraph is not properly formatted. Proficient .06 (6%) points Abstract paragraph includes all necessary components, with the exception of drawing a conclusion about the implications of the project. Paragraph is correctly formatted. Skilled .08 (8%) points . Author describes main idea & purpose of project in an organized, specific and concise manner. Identifies method(s) used to support thesis or answer research question. Provides explanation of what was expected, discovered, accomplished, collected, produced. Clearly states how work advances knowledge in the discipline, why it is important or how it can be used. Abstract paragraph is not correctly formatted. Exceptional .1 (10%) points Author describes main idea & purpose of project in an organized, specific and concise manner. Identifies method(s) used to support thesis or answer research question. Provides explanation of what was expected, discovered, accomplished, collected, produced. Clearly states how work advances knowledge in the discipline, why it is important or how it can be used. Abstract paragraph is correctly formatted. Feedback:

Ideas, Support & Development (Content)--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points Clear absence of support for main points. Did not meet the minimum page requirement of four (4) full pages (not including title, abstract, and reference page) Inadequate .04 (4%) points Lack of support for main points; frequent and illogical generalizationswithout support. Developing .08 (8%) points Insufficient, non-specific, and/or irrelevant support Proficient .12 (12%) points Main points and ideas are only indirectly supported; support isn't sufficient or specific, but is loosely relevant to main points Skilled .16 (16%) points Ideas supported sufficiently; support is sound, valid and logical Exceptional .2 (20%) points Consistent evident with originality and depth of ideas; ideas work together as a unified whole; main points are sufficiently supported (with evidence); support is valid and specific Feedback:

Sentence Structure--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points Unable to write simple sentences. Contains 13 or more errors in sentence structure. Inadequate .03 (3%) points Simple sentences used; errors with sentence structure. 10-12 errors in sentence structure. Developing .06 (6%) points Sentences show errors of structure; little or no variety (use of simple and compound sentences); no grasp of sentence flow. 7-9 errors in sentence structure Proficient .09 (9%) points Formulaic or repetitive sentence patterns; shows errors in sentence construction; non-standard syntax usage. 4-6 errors in sentence structure Skilled .12 (12%) points Effective sentence, varied (simple and compound sentences). 1-3 errors in sentence structure Exceptional .15 (15%) points Each sentence structured effectively, powerfully; rich, well-chosen variety of sentence styles and length. Free of sentence structure errors. Feedback:

Paragraph Structure/Organization--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points Paragraph structure does not exist; or is a single rambling paragraph or series of isolated paragraphs Inadequate .04 (4%) points Organization, if evident at all, is confusing and disjointedly paragraph structure is weak; transitions are missing, inappropriate and/or illogical Developing .08 (8%) points Paragraphs were simple, disconnected and formulaic. No evident transitions or planned sequence. Proficient .12 (12%) points Limited attempts to organize around a thesis; paragraphs are mostly stand-alone with weak or non-evident transitions Skilled .16 (16%) points Competent organization and paragraph structure; lacking in effective transitions Exceptional .2 (20%) points Organization is sequential and appropriate to assignment; paragraphs are well developed and appropriately divided; ideas linked with smooth and effective transitions Feedback:

In-Text Citations--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points More than 30% cited work and/or plagiarism/matching. Inadequate .03 (3%) points Zero in-text citations used throughout document. Developing .06 (6%) points One or two APA style in-text citations used throughout document. Provides very little and/or unrelated evidence to support opinion. Proficient .09 (9%) points Three APA style in-text citations used in the document. Evidence from text provides some explanation/analysis to support opinion. Skilled .12 (12%) points Four or five APA style in-text citations used throughout document with improper in-text citation formatting. Evidence from text provides clear explanation/analysis to support opinion. Exceptional .15 (15%) points Five APA style in-text citations used throughout document. In-text citations are in proper format. Evidence from text provides insightful explanation/analysis to support opinion. Feedback:

APA References Page--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points Reference page contains no Army doctrine resources, only internet webpages or no reference page. Inadequate .01 (1%) points References page contains one scholarly academic and no Army doctrine resource. Many errors with application of APA guidelines. Developing .02 (2%) points Reference page contains: two scholarly academic resource, text reference and Army doctrine resource. Follows most APA guidelines. Proficient .03 (3%) points Reference page contains three scholarly academic, Army doctrine references and text. Minor errors with application of APA guidelines. Skilled .04 (4%) points Reference page contains four required scholarly academic, Army doctrine references and text. Minor errors with application of APA guidelines. Exceptional .05 (5%) points Reference page contains four required scholarly academic, Army doctrine references and text. Follows all APA guidelines. Feedback:

Mechanics and Presentation--

Levels of Achievement: Unacceptable 0 (0%) points Errors in spelling and capitalization; intrusive and /or inaccurate punctuation, communication is hindered. 13 or more spelling, capitalization and punctuation errors. Inadequate .02 (2%) points Contains errors of punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization; errors severely interferes with meaning. Formatting weak. 10-12 spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Developing .04 (4%) points Contains errors of punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization. Errors interfere with understanding the meaning of the sentence. 7-9 spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Proficient .06 (6%) points Contains punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization errors. Errors in formatting or formatting is inconsistent. 4-6 spelling, capitalization and punctuation errors. Skilled .08 (8%) points Contains only occasional punctuation, spelling, and/or capitalization errors. Few formatting errors. Most errors likely careless. 1-3 spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Exceptional .1 (10%) points Free of punctuation, spelling, capitalization errors; appropriate format and presentation for assignment. Feedback: