Week 4 750

Criteria Ratings Points

Content: Action Research (AR-QUAN, AR-QUAL, or AR-MM)

25 to >22 pts

Advanced

Correctly identified a study with an action research design. Gave clear, concise, and detailed rationale for how it is known that the study used an action research design supported with page/paragraph from article and textbook. Correctly identified specific action research design (participatory, practical, etc.) and specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) or mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) providing clear, concise, and detailed support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Provided full article reference with hyperlink and both narrative and parenthetical in-text citations.

22 to >20 pts

Proficient

Correctly identified a study with an action design. Supported rationale for how it is known that the study used an action research design including page/paragraph from article and textbook. Correctly identified specific action research design (participatory, practical, etc.) and specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) or mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) providing support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Provided full article reference with hyperlink and both narrative and parenthetical in-text citations.

20 to >0 pts

Developing

Incorrectly identified study as using an action research design. Rationale for how it is known that the study used an action design is not included and/or is not clear and/or does not include page/paragraph from article. Did not correctly identify specific action research design (participatory, practical, etc.) and specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) or mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) and/or did not provide support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Is missing or gave incomplete information for one or more of the following: article reference with hyperlink, narrative, and/or parenthetical in-text citations

0 pts

Not Present

Does NOT correctly identify a study with an action research design that used qualitative methods only.

25 pts

Research Design Project: Action Research and Program Evaluation Pre-Matrix Grading Rubric | EDUC750_B11_202630

Criteria Ratings Points

Content: Program Evaluation (PE-QUAN, PE-QUAL, or PE-MM)

25 to >22 pts

Advanced

Correctly identified a study with a program evaluation research design. Gave clear, concise, and detailed rationale for how it is known that the study used a program evaluation research design supported with page/paragraph from article and textbook. Correctly identified specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) OR mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) providing clear, concise, and detailed support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Provided full article reference with hyperlink and both narrative and parenthetical in-text citations.

22 to >20 pts

Proficient

Correctly identified a study with a program evaluation research design. Supported rationale for how it is known that the study used a program evaluation research design including page/paragraph from article and textbook. Correctly identified specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) OR mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) providing support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Provided full article reference with hyperlink and both narrative and parenthetical in-text citations.

20 to >0 pts

Developing

Incorrectly identified study as using a program evaluation research design. Rationale for how it is known that the study used a program evaluation design is not included and/or is not clear and/or does not include page/paragraph from article and textbook. Did not correctly identify specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) OR mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) and/or did not provide support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Is missing or gave incomplete information for one or more of the following: article reference with hyperlink, narrative, and/or parenthetical in-text citation.

0 pts

Not Present

Did NOT correctly identify a study with a program evaluation research design or the correct specific design.

25 pts

Research Design Project: Action Research and Program Evaluation Pre-Matrix Grading Rubric | EDUC750_B11_202630

Criteria Ratings Points

Content: Student Choice of Program Evaluation or Action Research (must use different specific research design than used in previous articles)

25 to >22 pts

Advanced

Correctly identified a study with an action research OR program evaluation design. Gave clear, concise, and detailed rationale for how it is known that the study used an action research OR program evaluation design supported with page/paragraph from article and textbook. If using an action research design, specific action research design (participatory, practical, etc.) identified AND for AR or PE specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) OR mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) providing clear, concise, and detailed support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Provided full article reference with hyperlink and both narrative and parenthetical in-text citations.

22 to >20 pts

Proficient

Correctly identified a study with an action research OR program evaluation research design. Supported rationale for how it is known that the study used an action research OR program evaluation design including page/paragraph from article and textbook. If using an action research design, specific action research design (participatory, practical, etc.) identified AND for AR or PE specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) OR mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) providing support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Provided full article reference with hyperlink and both narrative and parenthetical in-text citations.

20 to >0 pts

Developing

Correctly identified a study with an action research OR program evaluation research design. Supported rationale for how it is known that the study used an action research OR program evaluation design including page/paragraph from article and textbook. If using an action research design, specific action research design (participatory, practical, etc.) identified AND for AR or PE specific quantitative (non-experimental, quasi-experimental, true experimental), qualitative (case study, phenomenology, etc.) OR mixed methods design (concurrent, explanatory, exploratory, etc.) providing support for how this is known (including page/paragraph) from article. Provided full article reference with hyperlink and both narrative and parenthetical in-text citations.

0 pts

Not Present

Not Present 0

Did NOT correctly identify a study with an action research OR mixed methods design or the specific research design.

25 pts

Research Design Project: Action Research and Program Evaluation Pre-Matrix Grading Rubric | EDUC750_B11_202630

Criteria Ratings Points

Content: Biblical Integration

20 to >17 pts

Advanced

Clearly connects how research design is encapsulated in a biblical worldview in detail using at least 5 sentences supporting each question with a different Bible verse.

17 to >16 pts

Proficient

Connects how research design is encapsulated in a biblical worldview in at least 3 sentences supporting each question with a different Bible verse.

16 to >0 pts

Developing

Does not make a clear connection with how research design is encapsulated in a biblical worldview and/or uses less than 3 sentences, and/or does not support each question with a different Bible verse.

0 pts

Not Present

20 pts

Structure: Mechanics/APA Format

20 to >17 pts

Advanced

Correct spelling and grammar are used throughout the pre-matrix. There are 0–2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. There are 0–2 minor errors in current APA format.

17 to >16 pts

Proficient

There are 3–5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. There are 3-4 minor errors in current APA format.

16 to >0 pts

Developing

There are 6+ errors in spelling, grammar, or sentence structure that distract the reader from the content. AND/OR There are 5+ errors in current APA format.

0 pts

Not Present

20 pts

Structure: Zip-file with Articles

10 to >9 pts

Advanced

Provided copies of all 3 articles identified in the template in PDF format.

9 to >7 pts

Proficient

Provides copies of all 3 articles identified in the template, but not all in PDF format.

7 to >0 pts

Developing

Provided fewer than the required 3 articles and/or the articles were not the ones identified in the template.

0 pts

Not Present

10 pts

Research Design Project: Action Research and Program Evaluation Pre-Matrix Grading Rubric | EDUC750_B11_202630

Criteria Ratings Points

Structure: AI Integration

10 to >9 pts

Advanced

The student clearly identifies and ethically uses M365 Copilot for one research design component in a single study, includes a complete and relevant AI conversation after the references, and integrates the AI-generated content accurately and thoughtfully into the pre-matrix.

9 to >7 pts

Proficient

The student uses M365 Copilot for one study as instructed, but the AI conversation or integration lacks clarity, completeness, or minor accuracy. The component is mostly appropriate but may need revision.

7 to >0 pts

Developing

The student misuses AI (e.g., uses it for multiple studies or fails to identify its use), omits the AI conversation, or provides inaccurate or poorly integrated content in the pre-matrix.

0 pts

Not Present

10 pts

Total Points: 135

Research Design Project: Action Research and Program Evaluation Pre-Matrix Grading Rubric | EDUC750_B11_202630