Microecomonics Essay
Example Rubric for Grading a Research Paper
|
|
Outstanding (20) |
Good (15) |
Fair (10) |
Unacceptable (5) |
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 |
PAGE
2