Project Part 1

Introduction: Specific Question

9.5 points

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates insight into connection between research and question

8.075 points

Develops specific question related to selected issue and based on review of science resources

5.225 points

Develops specific question related to selected issue, but question is not based on review of science resources

0 points

Does not develop specific question related to selected issue

0 / 9.5

Criterion Feedback

Thanks for your submission, China. After reading your document, I have noticed that you didn't develop a specific question that was related to your selected issue. This question is crucial to the development of an accurately written paper. Moving forward, please make sure to review our rubric before writing your paper to ensure that you are addressing all requirements to receive proficiency.

Body: Audience

9.5 points

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and identification of audience demonstrates insight into issue and question

8.075 points

Identifies an audience that would be interested in issue and question, citing source(s)

5.225 points

Identifies an audience, but audience is not appropriate for issue and question, or there are gaps in citation

0 points

Does not identify an audience

5.225 / 9.5

Criterion Feedback

China, thanks for your effort on this portion of your document. I scored you as needs improvement here because you needed to include citations. The reader would have benefited from the inclusion of citing a specific reference that is related to your target audience. This was necessary to achieve proficiency. In the future, make sure that you include the necessary resources to make your document stronger. Thanks, China.

Body: Message

9.5 points

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates sophisticated understanding of how to effectively communicate with specific audience

8.075 points

Describes how and why message can be tailored to audience, providing specific examples and citing source(s)

5.225 points

Describes how and why message can be tailored to audience but with gaps in examples or citation

0 points

Does not describe how and why message can be tailored to audience

5.225 / 9.5

Criterion Feedback

I like how you tailored your message to your audience, China, but there are some aspects that had gaps (i.e. lacking clear examples and citations to better connect with your specific audience). You needed more specific examples, terminology, and citations to help your audience to understand the major points in your research paper. Remember, one of your main goals is to help your audience understand what you are writing about. Moving forward, I suggest that you take this feedback and apply it to your writing in future courses. Please feel free to contact the SNHU Writing Center for more assistance in this aspect of your writing. Thank you for your work, China.

Body: Identify Principle(s)

9.5 points

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates insight into essential natural science principles

8.075 points

Identifies natural science principle(s) that apply to issue and question, citing source(s)

5.225 points

Identifies natural science principle(s) that apply to issue and question but with gaps in accuracy or citation

0 points

Does not identify natural science principle(s) that apply to issue and question

9.5 / 9.5

Body: Explain Principle(s)

9.5 points

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates insight into essential natural science principles

8.075 points

Explains how identified principle(s) apply to issue and question, citing source(s)

5.225 points

Explains how identified principle(s) apply to issue and question but with gaps in detail, clarity, or citations

0 points

Does not explain how identified principle(s) apply to issue and question

9.5 / 9.5

Conclusion: Hypothesis

9.5 points

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates understanding of scientific thinking

8.075 points

Formulates hypothesis that addresses question and is based on investigation of question

5.225 points

Formulates hypothesis that addresses question, but hypothesis is not based on investigation of question

0 points

Does not formulate hypothesis that addresses question

5.225 / 9.5

Criterion Feedback

This hypothesis needed clarity, China. You have formulated a hypothesis, however, there is a lack of it being based upon empirical (experimental) evidence. Therefore, this hypothesis does not address your question completely. To strengthen this key element of your Research Paper you must base your hypothesis on your investigation. Doing so demonstrates that you used logic to come up with it. The correct way to go about this is to use the wording from your Research Question and add specific themes you learned from your investigation. For example, if your Research Question was “Do hovercrafts make for the best mode of transportation in off-shore townships in Virginia?”, and your investigation found that hovercrafts use huge amounts of gas, your hypothesis might be “hovercrafts are more useful than cars for people living in off-shore townships, despite not being economical”. Moving forward, I suggest that you take this feedback and apply it to your writing in future courses. Please feel free to contact the SNHU Writing Center for more assistance in this aspect of your writing.

Conclusion: Natural Scientist

9.5 points

Meets “Proficient” criteria, and response demonstrates understanding of scientific thinking

8.075 points

Explains how a natural scientist would go about collecting evidence to support or refute hypothesis

5.225 points

Explains how a natural scientist would go about collecting evidence to support or refute hypothesis, but explanation has gaps in clarity, detail, or logic

0 points

Does not explain how a natural scientist would go about collecting evidence to support or refute hypothesis

5.225 / 9.5

Criterion Feedback

Clarity is needed here, China. You explained how a natural scientist would go about collecting evidence to support or refute the hypothesis you formulated. However, your explanation has gaps in clarity, detail, and or logic. There is a correct way to write this section. Typically, this requires that you list the hypothetical next steps (with specific detail) of a natural scientist, if they were to continue researching your hypothesis. Also, you must be sure to support your response with the natural science resources of your own selection. Moving forward, I suggest that you take this feedback and apply it to your writing in future courses. Please feel free to contact the SNHU Writing Center for more assistance in this aspect of your writing.

Reference List

9.5 points

N/A

9.5 points

Provides reference list that includes all science resources used to investigate issue and question, and list is formatted according to current APA guidelines

5.225 points

Provides reference list that includes all science resources used to investigate issue and question, but list has gaps in adherence to current APA formatting guidelines

0 points

Does not provide reference list that includes all science resources used to investigate issue and question

9.5 / 9.5

Articulation of Response

5 points

Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy-to-read format

4.25 points

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization

2.75 points

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas

0 points

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas

2.75 / 5

Criterion Feedback

There is an opportunity for improvement here, China. I like that you have submitted your final draft. However, the way you have articulated your thoughts has caused your submission to have some problems with citations. Moving forward, I suggest that you take this feedback and apply it to your writing in future courses. Please feel free to contact the SNHU Writing Center for more assistance in this aspect of your writing.

Rubric Total Score

Total

66.875 / 100