Business Finance - Accounting HOMEWORK
5 months ago
75
HSE490ASSIGNMENT4INSTRUCTIONS.docx
HSE490ASSIGNMENT3FEEDBACK2.docx
HSE490ASSIGNMENT4RUBRIC.pdf
HSE490ASSIGNMENT4INSTRUCTIONS.docx
Week Four Assignment
Top of Form
|
Hide Assignment Information |
|
|
Turnitin™ |
|
|
|
|
|
Instructions |
|
|
By the end of the week, submit draft of Chapter Two. |
Bottom of Form
Bottom of Form
image1.gif
HSE490ASSIGNMENT3FEEDBACK2.docx
Summary of Feedback
1. Your voice is missing
· You are summarizing sources too much.
· The professor wants more of your opinion, analysis, and interpretation, not just what the article says.
2.
3. Don’t end paragraphs with a source
· Ending with a citation makes it look like you’re only summarizing.
· You need to tie the source back to your topic or argument in your own words.
4.
5. Weave sources into your discussion
· Instead of dumping information all at once, mix the research into your explanation.
· Connect the facts to your problem statement or research focus.
6.
7. Some facts need citations
· The professor noticed statements without sources.
· If it’s factual, it needs a reference.
8.
9. Some paragraphs are too long / run-on
· Break long paragraphs into smaller ones.
· Make each paragraph focus on one idea.
10.
What the professor really wants overall
· Less summary
· More analysis
· More connection to your topic
· Better paragraph structure
· Proper citations everywhere needed
HSE490ASSIGNMENT4RUBRIC.pdf
Capstone Project Chapter Grading Rubric Course: HSE490 Supervised Senior Project
Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score
Analysis of
Information
/ 8.348.34 points
Completely exam-
ines the fundamen-
tal issues associated
with the research
question.
Analyzes key ele-
ments using current
and related litera-
ture that is credible,
authoritative and
focused.
7.5 points
Examines the funda-
mental issues asso-
ciated with the re-
search question but
there may be ele-
ments that do not
address the main
question
sufficiently.
Analyzes key ele-
ments using litera-
ture that is credible,
but may be irrele-
vant, or outdated, or
have limited author-
ity in the discipline.
6.3 points
Examines some is-
sues associated with
the research ques-
tion but there are
more than a few ele-
ments that do not
address the main
question
sufficiently.
Some Literature is
used that has ques-
tionable credibility,
or have issues re-
lated to relevancy,
currency or author-
ity in the discipline.
5.4 points
No submission (0
points) or Examines
few if any issues as-
sociated with the re-
search question.
There are many ele-
ments that do not
address the main
question
sufficiently.
Literature is used
that has minimal if
any credibility, or
relevancy, currency
or authority in the
discipline.
3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment - HSE490 Supervised Senior Project - National University System
https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 1/5
Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score
Evaluation of
Sources
/ 8.348.34 points
Demonstrates a
thorough appraisal
of the researched
information.
Sources have been
thoroughly reviewed
and assessed for
their contribution to
answering the re-
search question.
The work is pre-
sented as a congru-
ous and thoughtful
exposition of ideas.
7.5 points
Demonstrates a fair
appraisal of the re-
searched
information.
Sources have been
offered but may not
be thoroughly re-
viewed and as-
sessed for their con-
tribution to answer-
ing the research
question.
The work is pre-
sented as a thought-
ful exposition of
ideas.
6.3 points
Demonstrates a less
than fair appraisal of
the researched
information.
Sources have been
offered but for the
most part have not
been sufficiently re-
viewed and as-
sessed for their con-
tribution to answer-
ing the research
question.
The work is pre-
sented as a dis-
parate exposition of
ideas.
5.4 points
No submission (0
points) or
Demonstrates no
appraisal of the re-
searched
information.
Sources have been
offered but there is
little if any review or
assessment of their
value
or contribution to
answering the re-
search question.
The work is pre-
sented as an incon-
gruous exposition of
ideas.
3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment - HSE490 Supervised Senior Project - National University System
https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 2/5
Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score
Communication
Skills
/ 8.338.33 points
Conveys complete
and exceptional in-
formation on the
fundamental issues.
Contains all required
technical compo-
nents specified in
the assignment.
Contains fewer than
five formatting,
grammatical or
spelling errors.
APA Style is used
correctly
7.5 points
Conveys sufficient
information on the
fundamental issues.
Contains most re-
quired technical
components.
Contains no more
than 10 formatting,
grammatical or
spelling errors but
errors do not de-
tract from
understanding.
Good effort to use
the APA Style al-
though there are
some errors that do
not detract from
overall product.
6.3 points
Conveys minimal in-
formation on the
fundamental issues.
Contains few re-
quired technical
components.
Contains more than
10 formatting,
grammatical or
spelling errors that
detract from
understanding.
Some effort to use
the APA Style al-
though there are
more than a few er-
rors that detract
from overall
product.
5.4 points
No submission (0
points) or Conveys
no information on
the fundamental
issues.
Contains very few or
no required techni-
cal components.
There are so many
formatting, gram-
matical, or spelling
that it is difficult to
read.
Little or no effort to
use the APA Style
properly.
3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment - HSE490 Supervised Senior Project - National University System
https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 3/5
Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score
Critical Thinking / 8.33
Synthesis of
Information
/ 8.33
8.33 points
Content is ex-
tremely well thought
out and at times
demonstrates origi-
nal thinking. Critical
analysis of resources
and information is
present via interpre-
tation and focused
discussion obvious.
7.5 points
Content is well
thought out but
there is little origi-
nality in the thinking
presented. Some
critical analysis is
done but there may
be areas where re-
sources and infor-
mation are dis-
cussed with minimal
focus and
interpretation.
6.3 points
Content is pre-
sented coherently
but may not be fully
developed at the
graduate level.
Originality of con-
tent is difficult to
determine or merely
presents what oth-
ers have already
written. Critical
analysis is minimal
as many areas
present resources
and information
with only surface
level discussion.
5.4 points
No submission (0
points) or Content is
incoherent, or not
well-developed at
the graduate level.
Lacks Originality.
Mainly offers what
others have written
without focus, inter-
pretation or in-
formed discussion
No Critical analysis
is offered.
8.33 points
A consolidated, the-
matic integration of
the fundamental is-
sues. Extends re-
search well beyond
minimum
requirements.
7.5 points
A basic compilation
of the fundamental
issues, but integra-
tion of research into
a theme may be
fragmented in some
areas.
6.3 points
A response to some
individual issues
with insufficient re-
search and consoli-
dation of ideas.
5.4 points
No submission (0
points) or little evi-
dence of combining
researched material
into a consistent
whole.
3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment - HSE490 Supervised Senior Project - National University System
https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 4/5
Total / 50
Overall Score
Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score
Quality of
Scholarly
Research
/ 8.338.33 points
Selected resources
are mostly scholarly,
peer-reviewed, and
represent a disci-
plined inquiry into
the research
question/problem
for study.
7.5 points
Selected resources
may contain some
scholarly, peer-re-
viewed sources, but
most are not. The
sources inform prac-
tice. There is some
effort at inquiry
into the research
question/problem
for study.
6.3 points
Selected resources
have few if any
scholarly, peer-re-
viewed sources.
Some sources do in-
form practice but
inquiry into the re-
search
question/problem
for study is either
scattered or missing.
5.4 points
No submission (0
points) or Selected
resources are nei-
ther scholarly/peer-
reviewed nor do
they inform practice
meaningfully.
Connection to the
research
question/problem
for study is lacking
substance. There is
a lack of serious
research.
Honors 45 points minimum
Satisfactory 1 40 points minimum
Satisfactory 2 35 points minimum
Unsatisfactory 30 points minimum
3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment - HSE490 Supervised Senior Project - National University System
https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 5/5