Psychology Topic 4 Assignment

Rosi_226

PSY-260Rubric-FromJournaltoJournalism.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >Psychology Topic 4 Assignment

From Journal to Journalism - Rubric

Summary of Journalist’s Story 15 points

Criteria Description

Summary of journalist’s story, assignment introduction, and classification of journalist’s

claim (frequency, association, or causal).

5. Target 15 points

Paper expertly summarizes the journalist's story, assignment introduction, and

classification of the journalist's claim (frequency, association, or causal). The

description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support

claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 12.75 points

Paper clearly summarizes the journalist's story, assignment introduction, and

classification of the journalist's claim (frequency, association, or causal). The

description is strong with sound analysis and some evidence to support claims.

Paper demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the

topic.

3. Approaching 11.25 points

Paper adequately summarizes the journalist's story, assignment introduction, and

correct classification of the journalist's claim (frequency, association, or causal).

However, the description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims.

Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 9.75 points

Paper inadequately summarizes the journalist’s story, assignment introduction,

and/or classification of the journalist’s claim (frequency, association, or causal).

Missing evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a poor understanding of

the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely summarizes the journalist’s story, an introduction, and

correct classification of the journalist’s claim (frequency, association, or causal).

Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

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.

https://www.gce.com/

Summary of Original Research 12.5 points

Criteria Description

Summary of original research article including type of design, main variables, key

findings, and relevant theories.

5. Target 12.5 points

Paper expertly summarizes original research article including type of design, main

variables, key findings, and relevant theories. Description is comprehensive and

insightful with relevant evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an

exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 10.63 points

Paper clearly summarizes original research article including type of design, main

variables, key findings, and relevant theories. Description is strong with sound

analysis and some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates an

understanding that extends beyond the surface of the topic.

3. Approaching 9.38 points

Paper adequately summarizes original research article including type of design,

main variables, key findings, and relevant theories. Description is limited and lacks

some evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a basic understanding of the

topic.

2. Insufficient 8.13 points

Paper inadequately summarizes original research article including type of design,

main variables, key findings, and relevant theories. Description is weak and missing

evidence to support claims. Paper demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely summarizes original research article including type of

design, main variables, key findings, and relevant theories. Paper does not

demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Analysis Containing at Least Three Signi�cant Points 12.5 points

Criteria Description

An analysis containing at least three significant points of how well the journalist

covered the journal article.

5. Target 12.5 points

Paper expertly provides an analysis of the journalist’s covering of the journal article,

and description is comprehensive and insightful with relevant evidence to support

claims. Paper demonstrates an exceptional understanding of the topic.

4. Acceptable 10.63 points

Paper clearly provides an analysis of the journalist’s covering of the journal article,

and description is strong with sound analysis. Some evidence to support claims.

Paper demonstrates an understanding that extends beyond the surface of the

topic.

3. Approaching 9.38 points

Paper adequately provides an analysis of the journalist’s covering of the journal

article, but description is limited and lacks some evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic.

2. Insufficient 8.13 points

Paper inadequately provides an analysis of the journalist’s covering of the journal

article, and description is vague. Missing evidence to support claims. Paper

demonstrates a poor understanding of the topic.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Paper omits or incompletely describes an analysis of the journalist’s covering of the

journal article. Paper does not demonstrate understanding of the topic.

https://www.gce.com/

Thesis, Position, or Purpose 2.5 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 2.5 points

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

directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 2.13 points

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

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 1.88 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 1.63 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 2.5 points

Criteria Description

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

from development.

5. Target 2.5 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 2.13 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 1.88 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 1.63 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 2 points

Criteria Description

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

other perspectives.

5. Target 2 points

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

clearly considered.

4. Acceptable 1.7 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

3. Approaching 1.5 points

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

integration of other perspectives is present.

2. Insufficient 1.3 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 2 points

Criteria Description

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

structure, etc.

5. Target 2 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 1.7 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 1.5 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 1.3 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 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 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 0.85 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 0.75 points

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

errors.

2. Insufficient 0.65 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 50 points

https://www.gce.com/