|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Awakens and focuses interest on the writers agenda. Compelling.
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Presents an interesting idea, but has problems with clarity or focus.
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Does not attempt to generate interest. Serious problems with clarity or focus.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Restates the thesis statement and summarizes findings. Does not introduce new topics.
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Summarizes findings. Does not introduce new topics.
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Does not summarize findings adequately, and introduces new topics.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThesis Statement
|
| 10.0 to >8.0 pts
Excellent
The writer has a well written thesis statement with a clearly defined question or argument. It includes both a main idea and controlling idea.
|
8.0 to >4.0 pts
Adequate
The writer has a well written thesis statement; however, the question or argument is not clear. Includes a main idea but no controlling idea.
|
4.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Vague; general; ambiguous; or not included
|
|
10.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAssumptions
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Includes logical underlying assumptions necessary to complete the research; questions assumptions that others have made
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Includes logical underlying assumptions necessary to complete the research
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Does not include assumptions
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCentral Message
|
| 15.0 to >12.0 pts
Full Marks
The paper stays focused on the Thesis Statement. The paper answers the so what question, and every section consistently relates back to the thesis statement. The analysis is relevant to the central message.
|
12.0 to >9.0 pts
Adequate
The Thesis Statement is clearly stated in the introduction, but the paper does not connect to it consistently. The paper attempts to answer the so what question, but misses the mark in terms of presenting relevant analysis.
|
9.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Thesis is implied or not specific enough, and the paper does not connect back to it. The paper does not answer the so what question.
|
|
15.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEconomic Analysis
|
| 20.0 to >15.0 pts
Good
The paper uses Economic Analysis consistently and correctly. There are no errors in economic theory and the author’s knowledge of economics is apparent from the analysis.
|
15.0 to >10.0 pts
Adequate
The paper uses correct Economic Analysis but it is not consistent. There are no errors in economic theory presented in the paper.
|
10.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
The author has no economic analysis or incorrect economic analysis. There are errors in the economic theory presented.
|
|
20.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn-Text Citations
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Every in-text source is cited consistently and appropriately.
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Most sources are cited appropriately. However citations are inconsistent.
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Most sources are either not cited or cited incorrectly.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferences and APA Style
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA formatting and citation throughout, including a reference list.
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Makes some errors in APA formatting and/or citation, but includes a reference list.
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Makes many errors in APA formatting and citation. Reference list is lacking or has many errors.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContinuity/Transitions
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Includes continuity within paragraphs and sections; includes transitions between sentences, paragraphs and sections
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Includes continuity but inconsistent transitions between paragraphs and/ or sections.
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Lacks continuity or transitions.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSentences
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Includes complete sentences; uses parallel construction; uses subject-verb agreement
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Includes complete sentences; uses subject- verb agreement
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Includes incomplete sentences; lacks subject- verb agreement
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses active voice and professional tone to make it an easy read; engaging
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Uses a mixture of active voice and passive voice to make it readable, but with some effort
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Uses passive voice; awkward, convoluted, run-on sentences that make it difficult to read
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Mechanics
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Less than 5 errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
5 to 10 errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation
|
2.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
More than 10 errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTone
|
| 5.0 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses precise, formal and professional language
|
4.0 to >2.0 pts
Adequate
Uses clear, but imprecise language. A few informal sentences, but nothing that distracts the reader.
|
2.0 to >0 pts
No Marks
Uses generalities, unsubstantiated claims, informal language and slang or is highly conversational.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRoad Map
|
| 5.0 pts
Full Marks
There is a Road Map at the end of the introduction.
|
0.0 pts
No Marks
No Road Map at the end of the introduction
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCover Page
|
| 5.0 pts
Full Marks
There is a Cover Page with required details.
|
0.0 pts
No Marks
No Cover Page with required details.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePage Numbers
|
| 5.0 pts
Full Marks
Includes page numbers
|
0.0 pts
No Marks
No Page numbers.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeImprovements from Draft
|
| 15.0 to >8.0 pts
Full Marks
Read all comments on draft and revised the Final Paper based on all comments. Revised paper and followed at least 80% of the comments suggested.
|
8.0 to >0 pts
Needs Improvement
Revised paper only superficially. Did not revise based on comments. Did not make several of the suggested changes
|
|
15.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFile Naming
|
| 5.0 pts
Full Marks
Followed the required naming convention
|
0.0 pts
No Marks
Did not follow the required naming convention.
|
|
5.0 pts
|
|
Total Points: 130.0
|
