|
|
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
|
2
Less than Satisfactory
65.00%
|
3
Satisfactory
75.00%
|
4
Good
85.00%
|
5
Excellent
100.00%
|
|
70.0 %Content
|
|
|
35.0 % Describe the benefits of working in a team during the research process. (Competency 4.3)
|
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is missing.
|
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is vague or incomplete.
|
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is adequate and appropriate.
|
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is clear and makes some connections to research.
|
Description of benefits of working in a team during the research process is thorough and well-researched; makes connections to current research.
|
|
|
35.0 % Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited your research.
|
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is missing.
|
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is vague or incomplete.
|
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is adequate and appropriate.
|
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is clear and thoughtful.
|
Description of how feedback was used and how providing feedback benefited research is thorough and concise.
|
|
|
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
|
|
|
7.0 % 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. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
|
Thesis and\/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
|
|
|
8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction
|
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
|
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
|
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
|
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
|
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
|
|
|
5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
|
Surface 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) and\/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
|
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
|
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
|
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
|
|
|
10.0 %Format
|
|
|
5.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
|
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
|
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
|
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
|
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
|
All format elements are correct.
|
|
|
5.0 % Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
|
Sources are not documented.
|
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and\/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
|
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
|
|
|
100 % Total Weight
|
|
|