1
Unsatisfactory
0.00% | 2
Less than Satisfactory
75.00% | 3
Satisfactory
79.00% | 4
Good
89.00% | 5
Excellent
100.00% |
|---|
80.0 %Content | |
10.0 %Introduction | An introduction is not present. | An introduction is present, but it does not relate to the body of the paper. | An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. There is nothing in the introduction to entice the reader to continue reading. | An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. Information presented in the introduction provides incentive for the reader to continue reading. | An introduction is present, and it relates to the body of the paper. Information presented in the introduction is intriguing and encourages the reader to continue reading. |
20.0 %Comparison of Research Questions | No comparison of research questions is presented. | A comparison of research questions is presented, but it is not valid. | A cursory though valid comparison of research questions is presented. | A moderately thorough and valid comparison of research questions is presented. | A reflective and insightful comparison of research questions is presented. |
20.0 %Comparison of Sample Populations | No comparison of sample populations is presented. | A comparison of sample populations is presented, but it is not valid. | A cursory though valid comparison of sample populations is presented. | A moderately thorough and valid comparison of sample populations is presented. | A reflective and insightful comparison of sample populations is presented. |
20.0 %Comparison of the Limitations of the Study | No comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. | A comparison of the limitations of the study is presented, but it is not valid. | A cursory though valid comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. | A moderately thorough and valid comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. | A reflective and insightful comparison of the limitations of the study is presented. |
10.0 %Conclusion and Recommendations for Further Research | No conclusion and recommendations for further research are presented. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are presented, but they are not valid. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are valid, but they are cursory. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are valid and moderately thorough. | A conclusion and recommendations for further research are reflective and insightful. |
15.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | |
5.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
5.0 %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 logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that 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 or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they 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. |
5.0 %Format | |
2.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
3.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
100 %Total Weightage | |
