Psychology Topic 3 Assignment

Rosi_226

PSY-260Rubric-Benchmark-ResearchDisastersStructure.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >Psychology Topic 3 Assignment

Benchmark - Research Disasters Structure - Rubric

Background on the Disaster 18 points

Criteria Description

Background on the disaster, including what occurred, when, and the demographic

characteristics of those affected.

5. Target 18 points

Background on the disaster is insightful. Provides well-researched references to

support what occurred, when the disaster was, and the demographic characteristics

of those affected by the disaster.

4. Acceptable 15.3 points

Background on the disaster is present. Connections made between what occurred,

when the disaster was, and the demographic characteristics of those affected with

evidence of incorporating one's own research.

3. Approaching 13.5 points

Basic competence and completion of the disaster background is present. Described

what occurred, when the disaster was, and the demographic characteristics of

those affected by the disaster.

2. Insufficient 11.7 points

Background on the disaster is vague or missing. Does not adequately demonstrate

what occurred, when the disaster was, or the demographic characteristics of those

affected by the disaster.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Background on the disaster is absent. Does not demonstrate what occurred, when

the disaster was, or the demographic characteristics of those affected by the

disaster.

Collapse All

© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

https://www.gce.com/

Consequences of the Disaster 18 points

Criteria Description

Consequences of the disaster, including how the demographics of those involved

placed them at risk.

5. Target 18 points

Consequences of the disaster are insightful and well-researched. Provides

references to support why the demographics of those involved placed them at risk.

4. Acceptable 15.3 points

Consequences of the disaster are clear and concise. Makes connections to the

demographics of those involved and why that placed them at risk.

3. Approaching 13.5 points

Consequences of the disaster are clear. Basic description of how the demographics

of those involved placed them at risk.

2. Insufficient 11.7 points

Consequences of the disaster are vague or missing. Does not develop how the

demographics of those involved placed them at risk.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Consequences of the disaster are absent. Does not include how the demographics

of those involved placed them at risk.

https://www.gce.com/

Ethical/Legal Issues Involved in the Disaster (B) 18 points

Criteria Description

Ethical/legal issues involved in the disaster. (C3.7)

5. Target 18 points

Provides well-researched references to support the ethical/legal issues involved in

the disaster.

4. Acceptable 15.3 points

Provides relevant examples of ethical/legal issues involved in the disaster.

3. Approaching 13.5 points

Explanation of the ethical/legal issues involved in the disaster is clear.

2. Insufficient 11.7 points

Explanation of the ethical/legal issues involved in the disaster is inconsistent or

vague.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Does not explain the ethical/legal issues involved in the disaster.

https://www.gce.com/

Modern-Day Research Ethics Procedures and/or Practices 18 points

Criteria Description

Modern-day research ethics procedures and/or practices that were informed by the

disaster.

5. Target 18 points

Description of modern-day research ethics procedures and/or practices that were

informed by the disaster is well-researched and supported by referenced examples.

4. Acceptable 15.3 points

Provides some references that support the description of modern-day research

ethics procedures and/or practices that were informed by the disaster.

3. Approaching 13.5 points

Clear description of modern-day research ethics procedures and/or practices that

were informed by the disaster.

2. Insufficient 11.7 points

Description of modern-day research ethics procedures and/or practices that were

informed by the disaster is vague or inconsistent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Does not describe any modern-day research ethics procedures and/or practices

that were informed by the disaster.

https://www.gce.com/

Thesis Development and Purpose 4.5 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 4.5 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly

directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 3.82 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 3.38 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally

weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

2. Insufficient 2.93 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little

awareness of the intended audience.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate

audience is evident.

https://www.gce.com/

Development, Structure, and Conclusion 4.5 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves

from development.

5. Target 4.5 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression

of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and logical conclusion aligns to the

development of the purpose.

4. Acceptable 3.82 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on

each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. Approaching 3.38 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are

inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic

and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

2. Insufficient 2.93 points

Writing lacks logical progression of the thesis, position, or purpose. Some

organization is attempted, but ideas are disconnected. Conclusion is unclear and

not supported by the overall development of the purpose.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections

between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

https://www.gce.com/

Evidence 3.6 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers

other perspectives.

5. Target 3.6 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Relevant perspectives of others are

clearly considered.

4. Acceptable 3.06 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching 2.7 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or

integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient 2.34 points

Evidence is limited or irrelevant. The interpretation of other perspectives is

superficial or incorrect.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies

entirely on the perspective of the writer.

https://www.gce.com/

Mechanics of Writing 3.6 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 3.6 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 3.06 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 2.7 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 2.34 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language

choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language

choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

https://www.gce.com/

Format/Documentation 1.8 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, for college, subject, and level; documents sources

using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment

and discipline.

5. Target 1.8 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 1.53 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 1.35 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious

errors.

2. Insufficient 1.17 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors

in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 90 points

https://www.gce.com/