| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| CNL-545 | CNL-545-O500 | Detecting Abuse Paper (Obj. 5.1 and 5.2) | 80.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% |
| Difficulty of Assessing and Identifying Abuse | 30.0% | Does not demonstrate an understanding of the assignment directions; does not hypothesize the difficulty of assessing and identifying abuse. | Includes limited understanding of the assignment directions. A hypothesis is provided, but is irrelevant. | Provides a relevant, but cursory hypothesis. The hypothesis lacks depth and the rationale provided does not clearly support the reasoning behind the hypothesis. | Provides a relevant, thorough hypothesis that is supported by a concise rationale and clearly links the situation involving Yeardley Love with the difficulty of assessing and identifying abuse. | Provides a relevant, thorough hypothesis that is supported by a concise rationale; clearly links the situation involving Yeardley Love with the difficulty of assessing and identifying abuse; and supports the rationale provided with scholarly references. |
| Counselor’s Knowledge of the Abuse Cycle | 40.0% | Does not demonstrate an understanding of the assignment directions; does not describe how a counselor's knowledge of the abuse cycle would assist in detecting partner abuse. | Includes limited understanding of the assignment directions. Provides a description of how a counselor's knowledge of the abuse cycle would assist in detecting partner abuse, but the description is irrelevant or incorrect. | Provides a relevant, but cursory description. The description lacks the depth to fully illustrate how a counselor's knowledge of the abuse cycle would assist in detecting partner abuse. | Provides a relevant, thorough description that fully illustrates how a counselor's knowledge of the abuse cycle would assist in detecting partner abuse. | Provides a relevant, thorough description that fully illustrates how a counselor's knowledge of the abuse cycle would assist in detecting partner abuse and supports the information provided with scholarly references and real-word examples. |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | 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. |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | 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. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | 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), 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. |
| Format | 10.0% |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | 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. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent 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. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
olhutto
Rubric_Print_Format2.xlsx
