Upload
rxb224
View
221
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Rubric
Section Element Item Score Wgt
Sec Sub
Pct Points
Title Page 0.25
Short Title 90 0.1 0.09
Running Head 98 0.1 0.10
Title + Affiliation 95 0.05 0.05
Abstract 2.5
Contains the heading “Abstract” 100 0.25 0.25
On a separate page 100 0.1 0.10
120 words or less 90 0.15 0.14
Clearly summarizes the review 100 2 2.00
Body 28.1
Title is used as heading 80 0.1 0.08
Thesis statement is clear, meaningful 90 4 3.60
A
Depth of Research: Lit review is
thoroughly developed, supported, and
structured using only relevant
information 80 8 6.40
B Explanation of Literature 90 8 7.20
C
Final analysis shows understanding of
the research. 80 8 6.40
D References and Documentation 26.85
Use Zotero to get full credit on this part.
**Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
Overall, follow APA style. 90 0.2 0.18
In alphabetical order. 80 0.2 0.16
Double-spaced. 70 0.2 0.14
Have a hanging indent. 90 0.25 0.23
Must have at least 25 references. 70 8 5.60
All references must be cited in text
(otherwise do not include them). 80 3 2.40
All references cited in text must be
included in reference section. 70 3 2.10
Research notes (in Zotero) are
complete, and reflect how the sources
are used in the paper. 90 12 10.80
E Overall writing style, grammar, and mechanics 42.3
Length: 15-25 pages, but appropriate
to scope 100 4 4.00
Double spaced 90 0.1 0.09
Sections are in order 80 0.1 0.08
Appropriate font/size 100 0.1 0.10
Clear and concise writing, correct
grammar/spelling 70 20 14.00
Overall application of APA format is
correct (e.g., heading, citations,
numbers in text etc. -- see individual
format-related elements above) 100 8 8.00
Rubric was carefully reviewed 90 3 2.70
NEW!
Peer and UTF feedback was considered
and, when appropriate, led to revisions 70 7 4.90
Percentage total 81.88
Points this assignment 60
TOTAL 49.13
Comments Authors: Use this page
**Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
Rubric
Section Element Item Score Wgt
Sec Sub
Pct Points
Title Page 0.25
Short Title 100 0.1 0.10
Running Head 100 0.1 0.10
Title + Affiliation 100 0.05 0.05
Abstract 2.5
Contains the heading “Abstract” 100 0.25 0.25
On a separate page 100 0.1 0.10
120 words or less 100 0.15 0.15
Clearly summarizes the review 100 2 2.00
Body 28.1
Title is used as heading 100 0.1 0.10
Thesis statement is clear, meaningful 100 4 4.00
A
Depth of Research: Lit review is
thoroughly developed, supported, and
structured using only relevant
information 100 8 8.00
B Explanation of Literature 100 8 8.00
C
Final analysis shows understanding of
the research. 100 8 8.00
D References and Documentation 26.85
Use Zotero to get full credit on this part.
**Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
Overall, follow APA style. 100 0.2 0.20
In alphabetical order. 100 0.2 0.20
Double-spaced. 100 0.2 0.20
Have a hanging indent. 100 0.25 0.25
Must have at least 25 references. 100 8 8.00
All references must be cited in text
(otherwise do not include them). 100 3 3.00
All references cited in text must be
included in reference section. 100 3 3.00
Research notes (in Zotero) are
complete, and reflect how the sources
are used in the paper. 100 12 12.00
E Overall writing style, grammar, and mechanics 42.3
Length: 15-25 pages, but appropriate
to scope 100 4 4.00
Double spaced 100 0.1 0.10
Sections are in order 100 0.1 0.10
Appropriate font/size 100 0.1 0.10
Clear and concise writing, correct
grammar/spelling 100 20 20.00
Overall application of APA format is
correct (e.g., heading, citations,
numbers in text etc. -- see individual
format-related elements above) 100 8 8.00
Rubric was carefully reviewed 100 3 3.00
NEW!
Peer and UTF feedback was considered
and, when appropriate, led to revisions 100 7 7.00
Percentage total 100.00
Points this assignment 60
TOTAL 60.00
Comments
**Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
Rubric
Section Element Item Score Wgt
Sec Sub
Pct Points
Compariso
n
Title Page 0.25
Short Title 100 0.1 0.10 -10
Running Head 100 0.1 0.10 -2
Title + Affiliation 100 0.05 0.05 -5
Abstract 2.5
Contains the heading “Abstract” 100 0.25 0.25 0
On a separate page 100 0.1 0.10 0
120 words or less 100 0.15 0.15 -10
Clearly summarizes the review 100 2 2.00 0
Body 28.1
Title is used as heading 100 0.1 0.10 -20
Thesis statement is clear, meaningful 100 4 4.00 -10
A
Depth of Research: Lit review is
thoroughly developed, supported, and
structured using only relevant
information 100 8 8.00 -20
B Explanation of Literature 100 8 8.00 -10
C
Final analysis shows understanding of
the research. 100 8 8.00 -20
D References and Documentation 26.85
Use Zotero to get full credit on this part.
**Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
Overall, follow APA style. 100 0.2 0.20 -10
In alphabetical order. 100 0.2 0.20 -20
Double-spaced. 100 0.2 0.20 -30
Have a hanging indent. 100 0.25 0.25 -10
Must have at least 25 references. 100 8 8.00 -30
All references must be cited in text
(otherwise do not include them). 100 3 3.00 -20
All references cited in text must be
included in reference section. 100 3 3.00 -30
Research notes (in Zotero) are
complete, and reflect how the sources
are used in the paper. 100 12 12.00 -10
E Overall writing style, grammar, and mechanics 42.3
Length: 15-25 pages, but appropriate
to scope 100 4 4.00 0
Double spaced 100 0.1 0.10 -10
Sections are in order 100 0.1 0.10 -20
Appropriate font/size 100 0.1 0.10 0
Clear and concise writing, correct
grammar/spelling 100 20 20.00 -30
Overall application of APA format is
correct (e.g., heading, citations,
numbers in text etc. -- see individual
format-related elements above) 100 8 8.00 0
Rubric was carefully reviewed 100 3 3.00 -10
NEW!
Peer and UTF feedback was considered
and, when appropriate, led to revisions 100 7 7.00
Percentage total 100.00 0
Points this assignment 60
TOTAL 60.00
Comments
**Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
Element Exceeds Standard: 86-100%* Meets Standard: 80-85% Approaches Standard: 70-79% Falls Below Standard 69% or lower
A: Depth of
Research · Provides complete, accurate and
relevant information based firmly
on extensive and careful evaluation of the research.
· The required number of relevant scholarly sources are included,
demonstrating extensive, in-depth research.
· Provides mostly complete, accurate, and relevant
information based on research.
· The required number of relevant
scholarly sources are included, revealing adequate research.
· Provides basic, some of which may be incorrect and/or irrelevant
information based on minimal research.
· Too few relevant scholarly sources are included, revealing
marginal research.
· Paper is lacking information and/or information is inaccurate and
irrelevant needing much more research.
· Over-reliance on non-academic and secondary sources.
B: Explanation
of Literature · Background provides an excellent
foundation to understand salient
concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are explained thoroughly and concisely present
information necessary for understanding the topic.
· Background provides a strong foundation to understand salient
concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are explained adequately and usually
present information necessary for understanding the topic.
· Background provides a good foundation to understand salient
concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are usually explained clearly and sometimes
present information necessary for understanding the topic.
· Background should have provided much more information to explain
pertinent concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are confusing and rarely present information
necessary for understanding the topic.
C: Final
Analysis · Demonstrates in-depth
understanding and insight into the topic through careful analysis and
reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate provocative and logical critical
thinking about the topic.
· Ideas for future research flow
easily from the critique of current research and provide an engaging
avenue of study.
· Demonstrates a general
understanding of the topic with some analysis and reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate logical critical thinking.
· Ideas for future research
generally flow from the critique of current research and provide
an interesting avenue of study.
· Demonstrates some
understanding of the topic, but with limited analysis and
reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate basic understanding, but reflect
minimal critical thought.
· Ideas for future research only
somewhat flow from the critique of current evidence.
· Demonstrates little understanding of
the topic through minimal analysis and reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate no critical thought.
· Ideas for future research do not flow
from the critique of current research and fail to provide a connected
avenue of study
D: Research Documentation
· Sources referenced in paper at all necessary points
· All citations--in-text and
references--follow APA format.
· Notes in Zotero are accurate, and clearly related to the paper.
· Sources mostly referenced in paper
· No more than one or two citation
errors in the text or references.
· Notes in Zotero are largely accurate and mostly reflected in
the paper.
· Some facts not referenced
· Several citation errors in the text or references.
· Notes in Zotero are spotty, don’t appear to be clearly reflected in the paper.
· Spotty documentation of facts in text
· Pattern of citation errors in the text
and references.
· Few or no notes in Zotero, and little or no relationship between them and
the paper.
E: Grammar, Mechanics, &
Organization
· No grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors.
· The paper moves toward a clear
conclusion with a marked sense of logical progression and symmetry.
· Paragraphs were structured well; sentence structure was impressive.
· Almost no grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors
· Paper usually flows well
forwarding a logical progression of thoughts.
· Paragraphs were mostly structured well; sentences were designed well.
· Few grammatical spelling or punctuation errors.
· The paper’s direction is
somewhat clear, but is confusing at times.
· Paragraph organization was confusing at times; sentences were mostly designed well.
· Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors.
· The paper lacks a clear sense of
order and direction.
· Paragraph structure was not clear; sentences depended heavily on
passive voice or were confusing.
* Note that on preliminary drafts, expectations are somewhat lower and as a result, scores may be higher, relative to scores (and expectations) on later drafts.
Adapted from materials developed at The Harker School: http://harker.libguides.com/LitReview
Element Exceeds Standard: 86-100%* Meets Standard: 80-85% Approaches Standard: 70-79% Falls Below Standard 69% or lower
A: Depth of
Research · Provides complete, accurate and
relevant information based firmly
on extensive and careful evaluation of the research.
· The required number of relevant scholarly sources are included,
demonstrating extensive, in-depth research.
· Provides mostly complete, accurate, and relevant
information based on research.
· The required number of relevant
scholarly sources are included, revealing adequate research.
· Provides basic, some of which may be incorrect and/or irrelevant
information based on minimal research.
· Too few relevant scholarly sources are included, revealing
marginal research.
· Paper is lacking information and/or information is inaccurate and
irrelevant needing much more research.
· Over-reliance on non-academic and secondary sources.
B: Explanation
of Literature · Background provides an excellent
foundation to understand salient
concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are explained thoroughly and concisely present
information necessary for understanding the topic.
· Background provides a strong foundation to understand salient
concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are explained adequately and usually
present information necessary for understanding the topic.
· Background provides a good foundation to understand salient
concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are usually explained clearly and sometimes
present information necessary for understanding the topic.
· Background should have provided much more information to explain
pertinent concepts in the literature.
· Theories and studies are confusing and rarely present information
necessary for understanding the topic.
C: Final
Analysis · Demonstrates in-depth
understanding and insight into the topic through careful analysis and
reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate provocative and logical critical
thinking about the topic.
· Ideas for future research flow
easily from the critique of current research and provide an engaging
avenue of study.
· Demonstrates a general
understanding of the topic with some analysis and reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate logical critical thinking.
· Ideas for future research
generally flow from the critique of current research and provide
an interesting avenue of study.
· Demonstrates some
understanding of the topic, but with limited analysis and
reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate basic understanding, but reflect
minimal critical thought.
· Ideas for future research only
somewhat flow from the critique of current evidence.
· Demonstrates little understanding of
the topic through minimal analysis and reflection.
· Identified gaps demonstrate no critical thought.
· Ideas for future research do not flow
from the critique of current research and fail to provide a connected
avenue of study
D: Research Documentation
· Sources referenced in paper at all necessary points
· All citations--in-text and
references--follow APA format.
· Notes in Zotero are accurate, and clearly related to the paper.
· Sources mostly referenced in paper
· No more than one or two citation
errors in the text or references.
· Notes in Zotero are largely accurate and mostly reflected in
the paper.
· Some facts not referenced
· Several citation errors in the text or references.
· Notes in Zotero are spotty, don’t appear to be clearly reflected in the paper.
· Spotty documentation of facts in text
· Pattern of citation errors in the text
and references.
· Few or no notes in Zotero, and little or no relationship between them and
the paper.
E: Grammar, Mechanics, &
Organization
· No grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors.
· The paper moves toward a clear
conclusion with a marked sense of logical progression and symmetry.
· Paragraphs were structured well; sentence structure was impressive.
· Almost no grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors
· Paper usually flows well
forwarding a logical progression of thoughts.
· Paragraphs were mostly structured well; sentences were designed well.
· Few grammatical spelling or punctuation errors.
· The paper’s direction is
somewhat clear, but is confusing at times.
· Paragraph organization was confusing at times; sentences were mostly designed well.
· Many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors.
· The paper lacks a clear sense of
order and direction.
· Paragraph structure was not clear; sentences depended heavily on
passive voice or were confusing.
* Note that on preliminary drafts, expectations are somewhat lower and as a result, scores may be higher, relative to scores (and expectations) on later drafts.
Adapted from materials developed at The Harker School: http://harker.libguides.com/LitReview
Ser Section Item ManOpt Score WeightSec SubtPoints
1
2 Title Page 0.25
3 Short Title Man 100 0.1 0.1
4 Running Head Man 95 0.1 0.1
5 Title + Affiliation Man 95 0.05 0.05
6
7 Abstract 3.5
8
Contains the heading
“Abstract” Man 100 0.25 0.25
9 On a separate page Man 0 0.1 0
10 120 words or less Man 100 0.15 0.15
11
Clearly summarizes
the study Man 100 3 3
12
13 Introduction 25.6
14
Title is used as
heading Man 100 0.1 0.1
15
Introduces the
problem under
investigation Man 100 5 5
16
Lit review is
thoroughly developed,
supported, and
structured using only
relevant information Man 95 10 9.5
17
Central purpose is
clear and apparent. Man 100 5 5
18 State variables Man 100 0.25 0.25
19 State hypotheses Man 100 0.25 0.25
20
Length: 6-10 pages
depending on full
length of paper,
appropriate to scope
of proposal Man 100 5 5
21
22 Method
23 Overall 4.25
24
25
Subheadings are in
APA format Man 100 0.25 0.25
26
Materials +
procedures are written
in paragraphs Man 100 1 1
27
Clear, organized, and
easy to understand Man 100 3 3
28
29 Participants 1.1
30
Number of
participants Man 100 0.25 0.25
31
Demographics: sex,
age, race/ethnicity Man 100 0.25 0.25
32
General geographic
location (e.g.
University in
Northeast United
States) Man 100 0.1 0.1
33
Recruitment, selection
of participants, and/or
conditions of
participation (e.g.,
payment, extra credit,
nothing) Man 100 0.5 0.5
34
35 Materials and/or Measures Man 85 15 15 12.8
36 Experimental non-questionnaire study
37
Adequately describe
materials used
38
Where it came from /
who created it
39 What it assesses
40 Survey Study
41
The full name of the
measure
42
Where it came from /
who created it
43 What it assesses
44
Info on item
measurement (e.g., 7
point Likert scale)
45
Example of a sample
item
46 Observational study
47 Props/apparatus
48
Measurement
materials (e.g.,
stopwatch)
49 Data recording sheets
50
51 Procedures 7
52
Type of research
design Man 100 2 2
53
Include all steps in
procedure Man 95 2 1.9
54
Mentions what is
appropriate to
hypothesis and design
(e.g., subject
assignment,
instructions,
debriefing) Man 100 3 3
55
56 Proposed Results 0
57
Identification of the
statistical test used Opt
58 Restated hypothesis Opt
59
Hypothesis was
correctly supported or
rejected Opt
60
Correct interpretation
of findings across
groups Opt
61
All relevant data was
presented in APA
format Opt
62
63 References 4
65 Use Zotero and you will get full credit on this part.
67 **Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
68
69
Overall, follow APA
style. Man 100 0.25 0.25
70 In alphabetical order. Man 100 0.25 0.25
71 Double-spaced. Man 100 0.25 0.25
72
Have a hanging
indent. Man 100 0.25 0.25
73
Must have at least 10
references. Man 100 2 2
74
All references must be
cited in text
(otherwise do not
include them). Man 100 0.75 0.75
75
All references cited in
text must be included
in reference section. Man 100 0.25 0.25
76
77 Overall writing style and grammar 39.3
78
Length: 15-25 pages,
appropriate to scope Man 100 4 4
79 Double spaced Man 100 0.1 0.1
80 Sections are in order Man 100 0.1 0.1
81 Appropriate font/size Man 100 0.1 0.1
82
Clear and concise
writing, correct
grammar/spelling Man 93 35 32.6
83
Overall application of
APA format is correct
(e.g., heading,
citations, numbers in
text etc. -- see
individual format-
related elements
above) Man
84
85 Percentage total 94.6
Paper quality: 75% 70.944375
Process
Documentation: 10% 10
Process
Communication: 15% 15
TOTAL 95.944375
This is an ambitious
and impressive piece of
work. The thinking is
very strong. The
writing is good. You
get into trouble at
times. As a reader, I
appreciate the effort to
give some variety with
interesting sentences
and the like. It’s just
the next step for you:
doing that but keeping
it clear. So you may
want to back off a little
and go for simple,
direct, and clear. But
overall, this was one of
the very best works we
read. Fine job. Here’re
the details.
Comments
yes
h should not be capitalized
title not double spaced
yes
no
yes
yes
no
yes it is also reviewed
throughout the literature
review
The literature review starts
with the beginnings of TMT
and goes on to connect it
to other theories and
research in a fluid and
concise manner. There
are a couple of points
where I think the
connections could have
been explained better and
some concepts should
have been explained in
more detail.
yes, throughout the review
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
there is not an explanation
of the primes for mortality
salience or in-group and
out-group priming in the
measures section
yes in the procedures
yes
yes
unclear if participants are
working in groups or
individually but the rest of
the procedure is well
written and clear
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
**Remember to check references to make sure that they were imported in the correct format from psycINFO or PubMed.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
very good, a couple of
spelling mistakes and
some places where
sentence structure was a
bit unclear.
completed proposal,
handed in references and
Zotero file
communicated when
necessary and completed
check ins