Education Research Methodology Presentation Assignment

Criteria Ratings Points

Content: Introduction, Literature Review

52 to >47 pts

Advanced

Key points are concisely summarized in the introduction and literature review sections with balance, clarity, and relevance and are supported by research citations.

47 to >43 pts

Proficient

Most key points in the introduction and literature review sections are summarized with clarity and relevance and are supported by research citations.

43 to >0 pts

Developing

While some key points in the introduction and literature review sections are addressed, there is a lack of focus, important information is neglected, and/or sufficient research citations are not provided.

0 pts

Not Present

/ 52 pts

Research Design

35 to >31 pts

Advanced

A sound research design (i.e., Experimental, Quasi-Experimental, Correlational, Causal-Comparative, Qualitative Phenomenology, Qualitative Case Study, Qualitative Ethnography) and theoretical or conceptual framework are proposed that are relevant to the research topic and research question(s), which are clearly identified and detailed. Appropriate references are provided to justify methodological choices.

31 to >28 pts

Proficient

A sound research design (i.e., Experimental, Quasi-Experimental, Correlational, Causal-Comparative, Qualitative Phenomenology, Qualitative Case Study, Qualitative Ethnography) and theoretical or conceptual framework are proposed, but alignment between these elements and the research question(s) and research topic are not clear. The research topic and research question(s) are identified but may need further detail. Some references are provided to justify methodological choices, but more are needed.

28 to >0 pts

Developing

A research design (i.e., Experimental, Quasi-Experimental, Correlational, Causal-Comparative, Qualitative Phenomenology, Qualitative Case Study, Qualitative Ethnography) and theoretical or conceptual framework are proposed, but they are not appropriate to the research question(s) and research topic, which are not clearly identified in the presentation. Few or no references are provided to justify methodological choices.

0 pts

Not Present

/ 35 pts

Research Methodology Presentation Grading Rubric

Criteria Ratings Points

Data Collection and Analysis

35 to >31 pts

Advanced

Sound data collection and data analysis strategies are proposed that are appropriate to the stated research design. Appropriate references are provided to justify the proposed data collection and analysis strategies. The presentation includes all 4 of the following: 1.) Discussion of data gathering methods (qualitative designs) OR data collection protocol and instrumentation (quantitative designs), 2.) sample population (to include demonstration of social responsibility [SCRIP] by including a specific sampling strategy [i.e., random sampling, purposeful convenience sampling, etc.], desired sample size, and steps taken to ensure as diverse a sample as possible for the topic), 3.) discussion of data analysis strategy (qualitative designs) OR chosen statistical analysis (quantitative designs), and 4.) discussion of trustworthiness (qualitative designs) OR validity and reliability (quantitative designs).

31 to >28 pts

Proficient

Sound data collection and data analysis strategies are proposed, but alignment between these elements and the stated research design is not clear. Some references are provided to justify the proposed data collection and analysis strategies, but more are needed. The presentation includes 3 of the following: Discussion of data gathering methods (qualitative designs) OR data collection protocol and instrumentation (quantitative designs), 2.) sample population (to include demonstration of social responsibility [SCRIP] by including a specific sampling strategy [i.e., random sampling, purposeful convenience sampling, etc.], desired sample size, and steps taken to ensure as diverse a sample as possible for the topic), 3.) discussion of data analysis strategy (qualitative designs) OR chosen statistical analysis (quantitative designs), and 4.) discussion of trustworthiness (qualitative designs) OR validity and reliability (quantitative designs).

28 to >0 pts

Developing

Data collection and data analysis strategies are proposed, but are not appropriate to the stated research design. Few or no references are provided to justify the proposed data collection and analysis strategies. The presentation includes 1–2 of the following: 1.) Discussion of data gathering methods (qualitative designs) OR data collection protocol and instrumentation (quantitative designs), 2.) sample population (to include demonstration of social responsibility [SCRIP] by including a specific sampling strategy [i.e., random sampling, purposeful convenience sampling, etc.], desired sample size, and steps taken to ensure as diverse a sample as possible for the topic), 3.) discussion of data analysis strategy (qualitative designs) OR chosen statistical analysis (quantitative designs), and 4.) discussion of trustworthiness (qualitative designs) OR validity and reliability (quantitative designs).

0 pts

Not Present

/ 35 pts

Research Methodology Presentation Grading Rubric

Criteria Ratings Points

Sentence Structure

10 to >9 pts

Advanced

Sentences are well-phrased and varied in length and structure. Writing displays concise, interesting, and focused introductory and concluding sentences.

9 to >7 pts

Proficient

Sentences are well-phrased, and there is some variety in length and structure. Writing displays clear introductory and concluding sentences.

7 to >0 pts

Developing

Some sentences are awkwardly constructed so that the reader is occasionally distracted. Writing displays vague introductory and concluding sentence.

0 pts

Not Present

/ 10 pts

Mechanics and Current APA Format

33 to >29 pts

Advanced

The writing is free of grammatical, mechanical, and APA formatting errors. Past-tense verbs are used for conducted studies and future-tense for the candidate's proposed study. The presentation includes a references section with at least 5 articles from scholarly, peer-reviewed journals.

29 to >27 pts

Proficient

There are few (1–3) grammatical, mechanical, or APA formatting errors, and they do not represent a major distraction or obscure meaning. Tenses are mostly consistent with the assignment instructions. The presentation includes a references section with 4 articles from scholarly, peer-reviewed journals.

27 to >0 pts

Developing

The writing has many mechanical, grammatical, or APA formatting errors. Tenses are not consistent with the assignment instructions. The presentation includes a references section with fewer than 4 articles from scholarly, peer-reviewed journals.

0 pts

Not Present

/ 33 pts

Slide Elements and Design

10 to >9 pts

Advanced

There are 10–20 slides present that include all elements listed in the assignment instructions and do not use notes or audio recordings. The slides are visually interesting and include pertinent information. Numerous uses of graphics, images, pictures, and/or charts are present. The selected font style and color are easy to read against the slide background color.

9 to >7 pts

Proficient

There are 10–20 slides that include most elements listed in the assignment instructions and do not use notes or audio recordings. Most slides read with ease and include pertinent information. There is limited use of graphics, images, pictures, and/or charts. The presentation uses appropriate text and slides for the purpose.

7 to >0 pts

Developing

There are too few or too many slides that do not include most of the elements listed in the assignment instructions. Notes or audio recordings may be present. The presentation is difficult to read, with too much or too little information on each slide. There are few or no uses of graphics, images, pictures, and/or charts.

0 pts

Not Present

/ 10 pts

Total Points: -

Research Methodology Presentation Grading Rubric