Professional Presentation

1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%

2 Less Than Satisfactory 65.00%

3 Satisfactory 75.00%

4 Good 85.00%

5 Excellent 100.00%

70.0 %Content

40.0 % Reflective Evaluation

Analysis of the assignment criteria is not outlined or outlined poorly.

Ignores or superficially evaluates the assignment criteria. Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions.

Surface level of evaluation of the assignment criteria is offered. Claims and ideas of the criteria are supported.

Analysis is direct, competent, and appropriate of the assignment criteria.

Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major points of the assignment criteria. Draws warranted, judicious, nonfallacious conclusions. Information and evidence are accurate and appropriate.

30.0 % Professional Presentation (PowerPoint, workshop or video)

The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text and small font point sizes, inappropriate contrasting colors, poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting.

The layout shows some structure but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or uses a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult with lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text.

The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy-to-read, but in a few places, the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability.

The layout background and text complement each other and enables the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy-to-read and point size varies appropriately for readings and text.

The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of text.

20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive, reflective of the arguments, and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument supports the purpose logically but not thoroughly. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice, sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

10.0 %Format

5.0 % Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

Appropriate template is used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

5.0 % Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

Reference page lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

Reference page is present and inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.

100 % Total Weightage