Less Than Satisfactory
||Introduction is either not present or not evident to the reader.
||Introduction is insufficiently developed and/or vague. Purpose is not clear, and paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
||Introduction is present but lacks clarity and/or depth.
||Introduction is clear, forecasting development of paper.
||Introduction is comprehensive; reader knows exactly what to expect.
|30.0 %Description of method, steps in process, and results using the chosen article and chapter 3 of the textbook.
||Description of method, steps in process, and results using the chosen article and chapter 3 of the textbook is either not present or not evident to the reader.
||Description of method, steps in process, and results using the chosen article and chapter 3 of the textbook is present, but is vague or insufficiently developed.
||Addresses the primary elements of the concept but fails to paint a clear picture of the concept analysis.
||Primary elements of the concept are present and evident to the reader. Clear picture of concept analysis can be easily detected by the reader.
||Thoroughly presents all of the information to portray a clear chronology as well as richness of detail.
|30.0 %Application to Practice
||Application to practice is either not present or not evident to the reader.
||Application to practice is present but insufficiently developed.
||Application to practice is present but development is cursory and lacks depth.
||Application to practice is evident to the reader. Arguments are cogent to thesis and support claims.
||Thoroughly presents the application to practice with rich detail and supporting arguments.
||Conclusion is either not present or not evident to the reader.
||Conclusion is insufficiently developed and/or vague and lacks any discernible purpose.
||Conclusion is present, but statements lack depth of understanding.
||Conclusion is clear and identifies key ideas regarding application of the concept to practice.
||Conclusion is comprehensive and paints a clear picture of the application concept to practice.
|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 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 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 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)
||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 fully 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 is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.
||Reference page is present and fully 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