Policy paper

Level of Achievement

Evaluators assign a one (0) to any measure that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance

Benchmark

1

Milestone 2

Milestone 3

Capstone

4

Content Development Thesis and ideas.

Main thesis is not clearly developed. Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop simple ideas in only some parts of the work. Minimally accomplishes goals of the assignment.

Main thesis is poorly developed. Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop and explore ideas through most of the work. Shows some signs of accomplishing the goals of the assignment.

Main thesis is evident. Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to explore ideas within the context of the discipline and shape the whole work. Generally accomplishes goals of the assignment.

Main thesis is clearly stated and present throughout the paper. Uses appropriate, relevant, & compelling content to illustrate mastery of the subject, conveying the writer’s understanding, and shaping the whole work. Completely accomplishes the goals of the assignment

Organization and

Disciplinary Conventions Clear & consistent organizational pattern; follows formal and informal rules of

criminal justice

Unclear organization or organizational plan is inappropriate to thesis. No transitions. Shows little awareness of criminal justice conventions.

Some signs of logical organization. May have abrupt or illogical shifts & ineffective flow of ideas. Follows criminal justice expectations at a basic level of understanding.

Organization supports thesis and purpose.

Transitions are mostly appropriate. Sequence of ideas could be improved. Uses criminal justice conventions consistently.

Fully & imaginatively supports thesis & purpose. Sequence of ideas is effective. Transitions are effective. Demonstrates successful execution of criminal justice conventions.

Mechanics Conventions

Spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, general proofreading.

Abundant spelling errors, nonexistent or incorrect punctuation, and/or severe errors in grammar that interfere with understanding.

Some frequent, incorrect punctuation, significant errors

in grammar causing interference with understanding in some parts of the paper.

Occasional lapses in spelling, punctuation, grammar, but not enough to seriously distract the reader.

Very few spelling errors, correct punctuation, and grammatically

correct, leading to clear understanding of content.

Control of Syntax

Language, word choice, and sentence variety

Uses language that sometimes impedes meaning because of errors in usage. Repetitive words and sentence types.

Uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity, although writing may include some errors in language, word choice, and sentence types.

Uses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. The language in the portfolio has few errors in language, word choice, and sentence types.

Uses graceful language that skillfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency, and is has very few errors in language, word choice, and sentence types.

Sources and Referencing Documentation and referencing of criminology and criminal justice research

Neglects important sources. Overuse of quotations or paraphrase to substitute writer’s own ideas. Possibly uses source material without acknowledgement.

Uses relevant sources but lacks in variety of sources and/or the skillful combination of sources. Quotations & paraphrases may be too long or inconsistently referenced.

Uses sources to support, extend, and inform, but not substitute writer’s own development of idea. Does not overuse quotes, but may not always conform to required style manual.

Uses sources to support, extend, and inform, but not substitute writer’s own development of idea. Doesn’t overuse quotes.

Conforms to required referencing style.

Level of Achievement

Evaluators assign a one (0) to any measure that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance

Benchmark

1

Milestone 2

Milestone 3

Capstone

4

Explanation of Issues

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description.

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, and/or backgrounds unknown.

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions.

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described systematically, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding.

Sources and Evidence

Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion

Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation or evaluation.

Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis.

Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.

Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a widespread analysis or synthesis.

Influence of Context and

Assumptions

Considers where appropriate the disciplinary, cultural, social, economic, technological, ethical, political, or personal context

Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Demonstrates minimal attention to context.

Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others’ assumptions than one’s own (or vice versa).

Identifies own and others’ assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position.

Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others’ assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position.

Student’s Position

Perspective, thesis, hypothesis

Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious.

Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue.

Specific position takes into account the complexities of an issue.

Others' points of view are acknowledged within position

(perspective, thesis/hypothesis).

Specific position is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue. Limits of position are acknowledged. Others' points of view are synthesized.

Conclusions and Related

Outcomes

Implications and consequences

Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes

(consequences and implications) are oversimplified.

Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and

implications) are identified clearly.

Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.

Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order.