|
|
|
2
Less than Satisfactory
65.00% |
|
|
|
|
100.0 %Content
|
|
|
35.0 % Subject Knowledge (Submit a 750-1,000 word proposal outlining a study you would like to conduct; examine some aspect of human development; and consider audience.)
|
Proposal ignores major points in the criteria; fails to examine a topic relevant to human development. Demonstrates no understanding of the topic.
|
Proposal superficially outlines a topic for a research study. Study minimally examines an aspect of human development with sources that are not scholarly. Draws no conclusions. Does not consider the audience. Demonstrates less than satisfactory understanding of subject.
|
Proposal minimally outlines a topic for a research study. Study examines an aspect of human development with only some sources that support claims; some sources are not scholarly. Inadequately considers the audience. Demonstrates a limited understanding of subject.
|
Proposal adequately outlines a relevant topic for a research study. Study accurately examines an aspect of human development with scholarly sources that support final claims. Considers the audience. Demonstrates a good understanding of subject.
|
Proposal comprehensively outlines an appropriate and relevant topic for a research study. Study accurately examines an aspect of human development with appropriate and interesting scholarly sources that support judicious claims. Thoughtfully considers audience. Demonstrates a thorough understanding of subject.
|
|
15.0 % Topic Selection (A lifespan topic: Explain the topic you have selected and provide reasoning for the research study.)
|
This section of the proposal does not explain the selected topic; ignores assignment criteria.
|
This section of the proposal superficially explains the selected topic; provides no reasoning for research study.
|
This section of the proposal minimally explains the selected topic relevant to lifespan; provides little reasoning for research study.
|
This section of the proposal adequately explains the selected topic relevant to lifespan; provides reasoning for research study.
|
This section of the proposal thoroughly explains the selected topic relevant to lifespan; provides thorough and sound reasoning for research study.
|
|
5.0 % Study Design (Briefly describe study design [e.g., correlation, experiment, quasi-experiment, etc.])
|
Study design is not included in proposal.
|
Study design description is provided, but lacks details.
|
A minimal description of study design is provided.
|
An adequate description of study design is provided and explained.
|
A detailed description of study design is provided and thoroughly explained in detail.
|
|
5.0 % Methodology (Explain the methods for conducting the experiment [i.e., how would you propose to study their selected topic and what is the IV/DV, if applicable].)
|
Methodology is not presented; major points of the criteria are ignored.
|
Methodology is superficially presented; very little information about how the proposed study will be conducted is provided.
|
Methodology is minimally presented; presents some information about how the proposed study will be conducted; lacks specifics and details.
|
Methodology is clearly presented; adequately explains how the proposed study will be conducted in detail.
|
Methodology is thoroughly explained; specifics and details of how the proposed study will be conducted are provided and elaborated upon.
|
|
5.0 % Timeframe (Present the timeframe for the study [e.g., longitudinal, cross-sectional, or mixed design] with details.)
|
Timeframe for study is missing; ignores major points of the criteria.
|
Timeframe for study is incomplete.
|
A timeframe for study is minimally presented; lacks specifics and details.
|
An adequate timeframe for study is carefully presented and detailed.
|
A comprehensive and detailed timeframe for study is carefully presented and is relevant to the proposed study.
|
|
5.0 % Conclusion (Summarize your proposal succinctly.)
|
No conclusion is provided.
|
Conclusion does not provide a complete summarization of proposal.
|
Conclusion summarizes proposal.
|
Conclusion adequately summarizes proposal;
|
Conclusion succinctly summarizes proposal; carefully considers audience.
|
|
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 and 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 logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. 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, and 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 (register), 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.
|
|
5.0 % Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment.)
|
APA template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
|
Appropriate APA template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
|
Appropriate APA template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
|
Appropriate APA template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
|
All APA 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 is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.
|
