Week Two Assignment

1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%

2 Less than Satisfactory 74.00%

3 Satisfactory 79.00%

4 Good 87.00%

5 Excellent 100.00%

100.0 %Criteria

40.0 %Summary of the Key Points of Each Article

A summary of the key points of each article is either missing or incomplete.

A summary of the key points of each article is present, but incomplete or inaccurate with or more points missing or incorrectly identified for each article. The summaries do not demonstrate that the learner has a solid grasp of the articles' meanings.

A summary of the key points of each article is present, but summaries are overly cursory, and demonstrate only a vague understanding of the meaning of each article.

A summary of the key points of each article is present with all points addressed reasonably well. The summaries demonstrate that the learner has a moderate understanding of the meaning of each article.

A summary of the key points of each article is present with all points thoroughly addressed. The summaries demonstrate that the learner has a clear understanding of the meaning of each article.

40.0 %Description of How the Studies Lead to the Research Gap

No description of how the studies lead to the research gap is present.

A description of how the studies lead to the research gap is present, but it lacks depth of reason.

A description of how the studies lead to the research gap is present and demonstrates limited depth of reason though it is not thorough.

A description of how the studies lead to the research gap is present and demonstrates some depth of reason.

A description of how the studies lead to the research gap is present and demonstrates great depth of reason

10.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis.

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing

Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

5.0 %APA Format

Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used.

Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used.

Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present.

Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.

100 %Total Weightage