06760 - 4 - Pages within 12 Hrs

RESEARCH REPORT MARKING RUBRIC

Assessment 1 | Psychology: Behavioural Science (101183) CRITERION Unsatisfactory Does Not Meet Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations

Outstanding Scholarship

Information Literacy and General Logical Flow Critical evaluation of the literature and re- evaluation in light of the results

0 marks Summaries of scientific papers are either absent from the introduction, or studies and/or theories are simply mentioned without any attempt to summarise the details. There is no critical evaluation. Re-evaluation of points in the Discussion is either absent or unclear.

2.7 marks A clear attempt has been made to summarise at least one relevant scientific paper in the Introduction (from the theoretical and/or empirical literature), but there is no critical evaluation. Re-evaluation of points in the Discussion is either absent or unclear.

3.5 marks At least one relevant scientific paper is summarised in the Introduction (from the theoretical and/or empirical literature). There is a basic attempt to critically evaluate theories and/or empirical methods in the Introduction, and some evidence of an attempt to re-evaluate key points explicitly in the Discussion in light of the study’s findings.

4.5 marks At least two relevant scientific papers are summarised in the Introduction (from the theoretical and/or empirical literature). There is a clear attempt to critically evaluate theories and empirical methods in the Introduction, and a clear attempt to re- evaluate key points explicitly in the Discussion in light of the study’s findings.

5 marks A wide range of relevant scientific papers from the theoretical and/or empirical literature is summarised concisely in the Introduction. There is clear critical evaluation of theories and/or empirical methods in the Introduction, and key points are re-evaluated explicitly in the Discussion in light of the study’s findings.

Support from appropriate scholarly sources

0 marks Argument premises (including technical definitions, theoretical perspectives, and empirical research) are not adequately supported by scholarly sources.

2.7 marks There is a clear attempt to support the argument premises (including technical definitions, theoretical perspectives, and empirical research) using primary or secondary sources, at least some of the time.

3.5 marks Most or all of the argument premises (including definitions, theoretical perspectives, and empirical research) are referenced using primary sources though there may be some secondary sources.

4.5 marks All of the argument premises (including technical definitions, theoretical perspectives, and empirical research) are referenced using primary scholarly sources.

5 marks All argument premises (including technical definitions, theoretical perspectives, and empirical research) are referenced using primary scholarly sources, and often with more than one appropriate reference.

Clarity of Premises and Conclusions

0 marks The function of most sentences is not clear.

2.8 marks Some sentences are clearly either a premise, evidence in support of a premise, or a conclusion, but most are ambiguous, unclear, or emphasise the wrong information.

4 marks Most sentences are clearly either a premise, evidence in support of a premise, or a conclusion, but some are ambiguous, unclear, or emphasise the wrong information.

5 marks Almost every sentence is clearly either a premise, evidence in support of a premise, or a conclusion.

Logical Structure of Experiment Report Sections Title 0 marks

The title is absent or irrelevant.

1 mark The title does not clearly express the relationship between the dependent and independent variables.

1.5 marks There is a clear attempt to express the relationship between the dependent and independent variables, but the title lacks clarity and/or conciseness.

2 marks The title expresses the research question clearly and concisely, accurately stating the relationship between the dependent and independent variables.

Abstract 0 marks 1.7 marks 2.5 marks 3 marks

The abstract is absent or cannot be followed.

There is an attempt to summarise the report, but the abstract is generally unclear and may be missing one or more of the following elements: an overview of the study aims, participants, method, findings, whether the hypotheses were supported, and implications of the findings.

There is an attempt to include all of the elements of the abstract (an overview of the study aims, participants, method, findings, whether the hypotheses were supported, and implications of the findings), but the abstract in unclear in one or two elements.

The abstract summarises the study clearly and concisely, within 150 words. It includes all of the following elements: an overview of the study aims, the participants, and the method, leading to a concise statement of key findings, including whether hypotheses were supported, and brief statement of key implications of the findings.

Introduction 0 marks 2.5 marks 3.2 marks 4.5 marks 5 marks

The introduction is entirely absent, or what is written does not resent any logical argument to justify the study.

There is an attempt to present a logical justification for the study in the introduction, but many sentences do not flow logically from one to the next and one or more of the crucial elements is entirely absent: an outline of the

The topic is outlined, and there is an attempt to explain the importance of the research area, with definitions of most of the relevant key terms and concepts. There is an attempt to state the study aim(s) but the argument justifying the

The topic is outlined and the importance of the research area explained, with definitions of key terms and concepts. There is a clear statement of the study aim(s) and a clear attempt has been made to justify the aim(s) using a logical

The topic is outlined concisely and the importance of the research area explained, with definitions of key terms and concepts, and a clear argument concludes with the study aim(s). The dependent and independent variables

topic, an explanation of

the importance of the research area, definitions of key terms and concepts, statements of the dependent and independent variables, and of the hypotheses.

aim(s) is unclear. An attempt has been made to provide a statement of the dependent and independent variables, and of the hypotheses, and at least an attempt has been made to provide a logical justification for them.

argument. There is also a clear statement of the dependent and independent variables, and of the hypotheses, and at least an attempt has been made to provide a logical justification for them.

are justified logically and the introduction concludes with a clear statement of hypotheses.

Discussion 0 marks 2.5 marks 3.5 marks 4.5 marks 5 marks

The discussion is absent, or what is written cannot be followed.

A statement of whether the hypotheses were supported is either absent, or the results are simply restated. There is no clear attempt to explain why the finding is important or how it advances scientific knowledge. Suggestions for future research are absent, unclear, implausible, or overemphasise methodological issues.

The discussion begins with a clear statement of whether the hypotheses were supported, followed by a clear attempt to explain why the finding is important and how it advances scientific knowledge. At least one suggestion for future research is provided, but it may not be justified logically or it may overemphasise methodological issues.

The discussion begins with a clear statement of whether the hypotheses were supported, followed by a clear attempt to explain why the finding is important and how it advances scientific knowledge. Suggestions for methodological improvements are provided, if applicable. An attempt has been made to justify logically the suggestions for future research, which mention at least one of the following three

The discussion begins with a clear statement of whether the hypotheses were supported, followed by an argument for why the finding is important and how it advances scientific knowledge. If suggestions for methodological improvements are provided, they are relevant and accompanied by sound reasoning. Suggestions for future research are justified logically and concentrate most heavily on potential

things: potential

development of theory, potential development of research, or implications for the real world.

development of theory and/or research, and on implications for the real world.

Presentation CRITERION Unsatisfactory Novice Standard Professional Standard

Formatting 0 marks The report has several formatting errors (title page, margins, line spacing, font size, etc.) according to APA6 style.

0.6 marks The report is mostly formatted correctly (title page, margins, line spacing, font size, etc.) according to APA6 style.

1 marks The report is entirely formatted correctly (title page, margins, line spacing, font size, etc.) according to APA6 style.

Spelling and Grammar

0 marks There are many spelling and/or grammatical errors.

0.6 marks There are a few spelling or grammatical errors.

1 marks There are no spelling or grammatical errors.

Formal Academic Style

0 marks The report is written using informal language.

0.6 marks The report has aspects of formal academic style, but also uses some informal style.

1 marks A clear attempt has been made to write the report in formal academic style.

In-text Referencing

0 marks The formatting of most in-text

0.6 marks The formatting of most in-text references is

1 marks The formatting of in- text references is

references is not correct APA6 style.

correct APA6 style. perfect, or near perfect, APA6 style.

Reference List

0 marks 0.6 marks 1 marks

The reference list formatting is mostly incorrect. It may contain many APA6 formatting errors or references that are not cited in the report. Sources cited in the report may be absent from the reference list.

The reference list formatting is mostly correct. It may contain systematic APA6 formatting errors or a reference that was not cited in the report. All sources cited in the report are in the reference list.

The reference list formatting is perfect or near-perfect. It may contain one or two minor slips in APA6 formatting, but the vast majority of references are formatted according to APA6 style. All items in the reference list were cited in the report, and sources cited in the report are all in the reference list.

TOTAL MARK /35

Note: The pass mark for the weighted items (i.e. the Research Participation Task, the Research Report, the Four Quizzes, and the Exam) is 50%. This 50% pass mark is a weighted cumulative mark, that is, you do not need to get 50% or more in each of the Research Participation Task, the Research Report, the Four Quizzes and the Exam assessments to pass the unit; rather, you need to achieve a total mark of 50% or more across these items. Final marks and grades are subject to confirmation by the School and College Assessment Committee.