ST04
Beauty03
ST3004_Rubric.pdf
©2023 Walden University 1
ST3004: Hypothesis Testing: Apply appropriate hypothesis test methodology to a research problem.
Assessment Rubric
Rubric Criteria Does Not Meet Expectations
Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
Hypothesis testing in research – non significant relationship
Write appropriate null and alternative hypothesis test for research question. LO1: Identify null and alternative hypotheses for chi square tests
One or both hypothesis statements is incorrect.
This rubric does not have a “Meets Expectations” option and will be graded as either “Does Not Meet Expectations” or as “Exceeds Expectations.” Faculty, please do not select this option.
Both hypothesis statements are written correctly.
Use p value to determine significance of relationship. LO2: Use p value determine significance
Response is missing or makes incorrect conclusion based on p value.
This rubric does not have a “Meets Expectations” option and will be graded as either “Does Not Meet Expectations” or as “Exceeds Expectations.” Faculty, please do not select this option.
Response clearly compares p value to alpha.
Explain significance based on p value. LO3: Explain how p value is used to determine significance
Response is inaccurate or does not explanation for how p value is used.
Response clearly explains how p value is compared to alpha to determine which relationship is not significant.
Response includes an exemplary explanation for how p value is compared to alpha to determine which relationship is not significant.
Write conclusion statement for hypothesis test. LO4: Analyze results of hypothesis test
Response is not present includes a conclusion that is unclear or incomplete.
Response explanation clearly explains which hypothesis is supported and what that represents in context.
Response includes an exemplary explanation as to which hypothesis is supported and what that represents in context.
©2023 Walden University 2
Explain type II error. LO5: Explain hypothesis errors in context
Response includes a conclusion that is unclear, incomplete, or missing.
Response includes a clear and correct explanation of type II error in context of situation.
Response includes an exemplary explanation of type II error in context of situation.
Hypothesis testing in research- significant relationship Write appropriate null and alternative hypothesis test for research question. LO1: Identify null and alternative hypotheses for chi square tests
One or both hypothesis statements is incorrect.
This rubric does not have a “Meets Expectations” option and will be graded as either “Does Not Meet Expectations” or as “Exceeds Expectations.” Faculty, please do not select this option.
Both hypothesis statements are written correctly.
Use p value to determine significance of relationship. LO2: Use p value to determine significance
Response is missing or makes incorrect conclusion based on p value.
This rubric does not have a “Meets Expectations” option and will be graded as either “Does Not Meet Expectations” or as “Exceeds Expectations.” Faculty, please do not select this option.
Response clearly compares p value to alpha.
Explain significance based on p value. LO3: Explain how p value is used to determine significance
Response is inaccurate or does not explanation for how p value is used.
Response clearly explains how p value is compared to alpha to determine which relationship is significant.
Response includes an exemplary explanation for how p value is compared to alpha to determine which relationship is significant.
Write conclusion statement for hypothesis test. LO4: Analyze results of hypothesis test
Response includes a conclusion statement that is unclear, incomplete, or missing.
Response explanation clearly explains which hypothesis is supported and what that represents in context.
Response includes an exemplary explanation for which hypothesis is supported and what that represents in context.
Explain type I error. LO5: Explain hypothesis errors in context
Response is unclear, incomplete, or missing.
Response includes a clear and correct explanation of type I error in context of situation.
Response includes an exemplary explanation of type I error in context of situation.
Test for means
©2023 Walden University 3
Explain your choice of test for a given scenario. LO6: Justify selection of hypothesis tests
Response gives a justification that is inaccurate, vague, or incomplete.
Response gives accurate reasoning for choosing the appropriate test.
Response gives exemplary reasoning for choosing appropriate test.
Identify type of test (tails). LO7: Identify test as left tailed, right tailed, or two tailed
Response is missing or incorrectly identifies type of test.
This rubric does not have a “Meets Expectations” option and will be graded as either “Does Not Meet Expectations” or as “Exceeds Expectations.” Faculty, please do not select this option.
Response correctly identifies type of test.
Justify type of test (tails). LO8: Explain difference between tails of a hypothesis test
Response is missing or includes incorrect explanation.
Response clearly explains why hypothesis test represents type of test in regard to tails.
Response shows exemplary explanation as to why hypothesis test represents type of test in regard to tails.
Use Excel to run hypothesis test. LO9: Use Excel to run hypothesis test
Response is missing or includes incorrect Excel output.
This rubric does not have a “Meets Expectations” option and will be graded as either “Does Not Meet Expectations” or as “Exceeds Expectations.” Faculty, please do not select this option.
Response includes correct Excel output.
Write a conclusion statement. LO10: Analyze results of hypothesis tests
Response includes a conclusion that is unclear or incomplete.
Response includes a conclusion that is clear and complete and correctly uses data from Excel to justify conclusion.
Response includes an exemplary conclusion that is clear and complete and correctly uses data from Excel to justify conclusion.
State decision in context of research decision. LO11: State decision in non-technical terms to address original claim
Response includes a statement that is unclear or incomplete.
Statement clearly explains results of test as related to research claim.
Statement includes an exemplary explanation of results of test as related to research claim.
Comparing multiple means
©2023 Walden University 4
Explain your choice of test for a given scenario. LO6: Justify selection of hypothesis tests
Response gives a justification that is inaccurate, vague, or incomplete.
Response gives accurate reasoning for choosing the appropriate test.
Response gives exemplary reasoning for choosing appropriate test.
Use Excel to run hypothesis test. LO9: Use Excel to run hypothesis test
Response is missing or includes incorrect Excel output.
This rubric does not have a “Meets Expectations” option and will be graded as either “Does Not Meet Expectations” or as “Exceeds Expectations.” Faculty, please do not select this option.
Response includes correct Excel output.
Write a conclusion statement. LO10: Analyze results of hypothesis test tests
Response includes a conclusion that is unclear or incomplete.
Response includes a conclusion that is clear and complete and correctly uses data from Excel to justify conclusion.
Response includes an exemplary conclusion that is clear and complete and correctly uses data from Excel to justify conclusion.
State decision in context of research decision. LO11: State decision in non-technical terms to address original claim
Response includes a statement that is unclear or incomplete.
Statement clearly explains results of test as related to research claim.
Statement includes an exemplary explanation of results of test as related to research claim.
Professional Writing Professional Writing: Clarity, Flow, and Organization
Content contains significant spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing does not demonstrate adequate sentence and paragraph structure and requires additional editing/proofreading. Key
Content contains few spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates adequate sentence and paragraph structure and may require some editing. Content presented is satisfactorily clear, logical, and/or organized, but could
Content is free from spelling, punctuation, and grammar/syntax errors. Writing demonstrates appropriate sentence and paragraph structure. Content presented is clear, logical, and well-organized.
©2023 Walden University 5
sections of presented content lack clarity, logical flow, and/or organization.
benefit from additional editing/revision.
Professional Writing: Context, Audience, Purpose, and Tone
Content minimally or does not demonstrate awareness of context, audience, and/or purpose. Writing is not reflective of professional/scholarly tone and/or is not free of bias. Style is inconsistent with the professional setting/workplace context and reflects the need for additional editing.
Content demonstrates satisfactory awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is adequately professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is mostly consistent with the professional setting/workplace context.
Content clearly demonstrates awareness of context, audience, and purpose. Tone is highly professional, scholarly, and free from bias, and style is appropriate for the professional setting/workplace context.
Professional Writing: Originality, Source Credibility, and Attribution of Ideas
Content does not adequately reflect original writing and/or paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates inconsistent adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references. There are numerous and/or significant errors.
Content adequately reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates adequate adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references. There are one or two minor errors.
Content reflects original thought and writing and proper paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates full adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.
Professional Presentation Professional Presentation: Clarity, Flow, and Organization
Key sections of presented content lack clarity, logical flow, and/or organization.
Content presented is satisfactorily clear, logical, and/or organized, but could benefit from additional editing/revision.
Content is presented clearly, logically, and is well-organized.
Professional Presentation: Context,
Presented content minimally or does not demonstrate awareness of context,
Content presented demonstrates satisfactory awarenes s of context, audience, and
Content presented clearly demonstrates awaren ess of context, audience, and
©2023 Walden University 6
Audience, Purpose, and Tone
audience, and/or purpose. Writing is not reflective of professional/scholarly tone and/or is not free of bias. Style is inconsistent with the professional setting/workplace context and reflects the need for additional editing.
purpose. Tone is adequately professional, scholarly, and/or free from bias, and style is mostly consistent with the professional setting/workplace context.
purpose. Tone is highly professional, scholarly, and free from bias, and style is appropriate for the professional setting/workplace context.
Professional Presentation: Originality, So urce Credibility & Attribution of Ideas
Content presented does not adequately reflect original writing and/or paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates inconsistent adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references. There are numerous and/or significant errors.
Content presented adequately reflects original writing and paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates adequate adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references. There are one or two minor errors.
Content presented reflects original thou ght and writing and proper paraphrasing. Writing demonstrates full adherence to reference requirements, including the use of credible evidence to support a claim, with appropriate source attribution (when applicable) and references.
Interpreting Data & Quantitative Fluency: Interpret quantitative data in order to analyze issues and make decisions. 0
Not Present 1
Needs Improvement 2
Meets Expectations LO1: Identify conclusions from numeric information presented in narrative and/or graphic form.
No conclusions are made based on numeric information.
Connections between conclusions and numeric information are vague or inaccurate.
Conclusions identified are appropriately connected to the numeric information.
©2023 Walden University 7
LO2: Use both narrative and graphic form to explain the same data.
Graphs and/or narrative is not present.
Supportive connection between narrative and graph is not clearly explained.
Narrative explanation of quantitative data explains the graph, and the graph illustrates and clarifies the narrative.
