Economics

Outstanding (4)

Good (3)

Fair (2)

Unacceptable (1)

Abstract

Abstract is proper length.

Highly informative, complete and easy to understand.

Appropriate vocabulary is used.

Abstract makes you want to read the paper.

Abstract is proper length.

Informative, complete and understandable.

Appropriate vocabulary is used.

Abstract is proper length.

Somewhat informative and understandable.

Abstract is not the proper length.

Not very informative or understandable.

Structure

Thesis is clear, easy to find, and appropriate to the assignment.

Thesis is supported by the rest of the paper.

Paper contains a “roadmap” for the reader.

There is a logical flow to the topics/arguments.

Conclusion follows clearly from the arguments presented.

Thesis is clear and appropriate.

Thesis fairly well supported.

Paper is fairly well organized.

Conclusion follows from the rest of the paper.

Thesis is fairly clear.

Inconsistent support for thesis.

Paper weakly organized.

Conclusion is acceptable.

Thesis unclear and/or inappropriate.

Thesis not supported.

Paper is not organized.

Conclusion doesn’t follow from the rest of the paper.

Thinking

Arguments are pertinent to the topic.

Arguments are logical, supported with evidence.

The key arguments have been made – no major points have been left out.

Arguments are pertinent to the topic.

Arguments are fairly logical and reasonably supported.

Most key arguments have been made.

Arguments are not consistently pertinent, logical, or supported.

Few key arguments have been made.

Arguments not pertinent.

Arguments rarely, if at all, logical and supported.

Almost no key arguments have been made.

Interest factor

Language and style appropriate for intended audience.

Paper presents well-developed analysis and synthesis.

There is nuance, inference and subtlety to the paper.

Main points are memorable. Reader is very engaged.

Language and style appropriate.

Paper presents reasonable analysis and synthesis.

There is a little nuance, inference and subtlety.

Main points clear.

Reader is engaged.

Language and style only fair.

Less-developed analysis and synthesis.

Nuance, inference and subtlety lacking.

Main points present, not well made.

Language and style poor.

Analysis and synthesis lacking.

Main points not discernable.

Citations &

References

All references and

citations are

correctly written

and present.

One reference or

citations missing or

Incorrectly written.

Two references or

citations missing

or incorrectly

Written.

Reference and citation errors detract significantly from

paper

Empirical analysis supports the position;

Analyzes economic data in support of their position

Provides an analysis of economic data that support the position; quantitative or qualitative information is presented accurately

Provides an analysis of economic data that support the position; discussion is unclear or contains factual errors

Does not provide an analysis of economic data that supports the position, or the analysis contains serious factual errors

Integrates analyses and stated criteria for assessment

Provides a clear link between the theoretical and empirical analyses and the assessment criteria

Provides some link between the theoretical and empirical analyses and the assessment criteria

Provides some link between the theoretical and empirical analyses, but does not provide a link between the assessment criteria and the analyses

Does not provide a link between the theoretical and empirical analyses and the assessment criteria