Evidence-Based Project, Part 3: Critical Appraisal of Research

profileskulbukol
policies11.pdf

policies by B Ty

Submission date: 20-Jun-2021 08:39PM (UTC-0500) Submission ID: 1609726106 File name: 0S0789711X_Developing_Organizational_Policies_and_Practices.docx (23.28K) Word count: 1227 Character count: 6631

1

1

1

5% SIMILARITY INDEX

5% INTERNET SOURCES

0% PUBLICATIONS

4% STUDENT PAPERS

1 5%

Exclude quotes On

Exclude bibliography On

Exclude matches Off

policies ORIGINALITY REPORT

PRIMARY SOURCES

www.coursehero.com Internet Source

FINAL GRADE

/0

policies GRADEMARK REPORT

GENERAL COMMENTS

Instructor

PAGE 1

PAGE 2

PAGE 3

PAGE 4

PAGE 5

PAGE 6

RUBRIC: SOCIAL STUDIES SHORT ANSWER

FOCUS

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

APPROACHES EXPECTATIONS

DOESN'T MEET EXPECTATIONS

EVIDENCE

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

APPROACHES EXPECTATIONS

DOESN'T MEET EXPECTATIONS

DEVELOPMENT

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

APPROACHES EXPECTATIONS

DOESN'T MEET EXPECTATIONS

ORGANIZATION

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

 

State a clear claim/topic sentence and stay focused on supporting it.

A precise claim/topic sentence based on the historical topic and/or source(s) is present. The response maintains a strong focus on developing the claim/topic sentence, thoroughly addressing the demands of the task.

A claim/topic sentence based on the historical topic and/or source(s) is present, but it may not completely address the demands of the task, or the response does not maintain focus on developing it.

The claim/topic sentence is vague, unclear, or missing, and the response does not address the demands of the task.

Represent relevant historical information accurately.

The most appropriate evidence is presented to support the topic sentence, and all information is historically accurate.

Appropriate evidence may be presented to support the topic sentence, but it may be inadequate or contain some historical inaccuracies.

Evidence is general, inappropriate, or inadequate in support of the topic sentence, or is largely inaccurate.

Explain how evidence supports the topic sentence.

The response demonstrates reasoning and understanding of the historical topic and/or source(s), and sufficiently explains the relationship between claims and support.

Some reasoning and understanding of the historical topic and/or source(s) are demonstrated. The response attempts to explain the relationship between claims and support.

The response does not demonstrate reasoning and understanding of the historical topic and/or source(s), and explanation of the relationship between claims and support is minimal.

Present ideas in a logical structure that shows the relationships between ideas.

An effective organizational structure enhances the reader's understanding of the information. The relationships between ideas are made clear with effective transitional phrases.

APPROACHES EXPECTATIONS

DOESN'T MEET EXPECTATIONS

LANGUAGE

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

APPROACHES EXPECTATIONS

DOESN'T MEET EXPECTATIONS

An organizational structure is evident, but may not be fully developed or appropriate. Transitional phrases may be used but the relationships between ideas are somewhat unclear.

An organizational structure is largely absent and the relationships between ideas are unclear.

Communicate ideas clearly using vocabulary specific to the historical topic.

Ideas are presented clearly, using vocabulary specific to the historical topic. If errors in conventions are present, they do not interfere with meaning.

Ideas are mostly clear, using some vocabulary specific to the historical topic. Some errors in conventions are present that may interfere with meaning.

Ideas are not clear, using little to no vocabulary specific to the historical topic. Several errors in conventions interfere with meaning.