assessment

Literature Review Revision - Rubric

Summary of existing literature 72 points

Criteria Description

Summary of existing literature pertaining to the topic of the proposed study. Minimum

of 1250 words. Peer-reviewed sources were cited.

5. Target 72 points

Summary of existing literature pertaining to the topic of the proposed study is

thoughtful and makes relevant connections to current research in the field. 10-15

peer-reviewed sources were cited.

4. Acceptable 61.2 points

Summary of existing literature pertaining to the topic of the proposed study is

concise and makes some connections to current research in the field. 10-15 peer-

reviewed sources were cited.

3. Approaching 54 points

Summary of existing literature pertaining to the topic of the proposed study is clear.

10 peer-reviewed sources were cited.

2. Insufficient 46.8 points

Summary of existing literature pertaining to the topic of the proposed study is

vague or inadequate. Less than 10 peer-reviewed sources were cited. Did not meet

the minimum word count.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Summary of existing literature pertaining to the topic of the proposed study is

missing. Less than 10 peer-reviewed sources were cited. Did not meet the minimum

word count.

Collapse All

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Proposed research 24 points

Criteria Description

Explanation how proposed research will add to existing literature.

5. Target 24 points

Explanation of how proposed research will add to the existing literature and

research is insightful and makes relevant connections to current research.

4. Acceptable 20.4 points

Explanation of how proposed research will add to the existing literature and

research is thoughtful and makes some connections to current research.

3. Approaching 18 points

Explanation of how proposed research will add to the existing literature and

research is clear.

2. Insufficient 15.6 points

Explanation of how proposed research will add to the existing literature and

research is vague or inadequate.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Explanation of how proposed research will add to the existing literature and

research is missing.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose 12 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. Target 12 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly

directed to a specific audience.

4. Acceptable 10.2 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately presented. An awareness of the

appropriate audience is demonstrated.

3. Approaching 9 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally

weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

2. Insufficient 7.8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is unfocused or confused. There is very little

awareness of the intended audience.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate

audience is evident.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Mechanics of Writing 6 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence

structure, etc.

5. Target 6 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence

structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable 5.1 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence

structure are used.

3. Approaching 4.5 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally

appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient 3.9 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language

choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language

choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Format/Documentation 6 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level;

documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc.,

appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target 6 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable 5.1 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching 4.5 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious

errors.

2. Insufficient 3.9 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors

in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory 0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total 120 points

© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.