Title Page
(5 Points) | | | | | Title of your applied discovery article.
Your indicate, e-mail harangue, series sum and style, schoolmistress, and conclusion. (5) |
Introduction
(10 Points) | Introduction is not notorious. (0) | Introduction is uncertain, meagre, or lacks a rendezvous. (6) | Introduction reflects hardly thorough advice to impart reader to the quantity composition. (7) | Contains a rendezvous and provides qualified specialty to set the range for the segregation but may embrace alien advice. (8) | Introduction has a sharp-ended, obvious rendezvous; thorough advice. (10) |
Problem Statement
(15 Points) | No quantity proposition notorious. (0) | Problem proposition is uncertain; does not combine after a while style of article. (9) | Presented in-great-measure as symptoms of the quantity. (11) | Presented as a stealthy disentanglement. (13) | Focused and terse. (15) |
Literature Review
(40 Points) | None supposing. (0) | Too shallow; inqualified depth; provides reconsideration of merely one source; does not adduce sources divertly; may embrace segregation of the quantity in this exception. (27) | Provides a reconsideration of merely 2–3 sources; does not harangue theme areas akin to the quantity; including segregation of the quantity; does not adduce some sources divertly. (31) | Provides a reconsideration of the narrowness six discovery articles; noncommunications allusion to insights or findings from divers of the readings that are useful to the quantity. (35) | Discusses the concepts, ideas, or insights that possess the most prize for subsidiary perform judgment of quantity; laudable use of citations; follows adapted citation protocol; exceeds all standards defined in the syllabus guidelines for the device. (40) |
Analysis
(40 Points) | No segregation incontrovertible or presents a simplistic, impertinent, or inconsequential segregation of or retort to the quantity. (0) | Illogically analyses the quantity; may noncommunication judicious erection or deduction after a while examples. Does not engage findings from attainment reconsideration. Clear noncommunication of indication to buttress segregation; performs generic generalizations and unbefriended assertions. (27) | Presents an thorough segregation of the quantity, elaborating the segregation after a while qualified examples and delicious forced. May not engage findings from attainment reconsideration divert. Lack of indication to buttress segregation; making generic generalizations and unbefriended assertions. (31) | Presents a mindful segregation of quantity, elaborating that retort after a while divert examples and judicious forced. (35) | Presents a influential segregation of the systematic quantity, elaborating that retort after a while well-selected examples and insinuating forced buttressed by the attainment. (40) |
Solution
(30 Points) | Solutions and instruction not embraced. (0) | The select of disentanglement(s) is not linked to the segregation. (20) | Presents merely a individual disentanglement that may or may not be abundantly buttressed by the segregation. (23) | Solution or instructions linked to the segregation. Partially buttressed and guarded. (26) | Solution or instructions logically run from the segregation. Well buttressed and guarded. (30) |
Reflection
(10 Points) | No inobservant proposition offered. (0) | Perfunctory attempt at plan lessons from the assignment. (6) | One key lesson; no other insights offered. (7) | Good credulity attempt in discussing the lessons from the assignment; some insights are embraced. (8) | Well presented insights on how the assignment influenced idiosyncratic, academic, and administrative harvest. (10) |
References
(10 Points) | Few or no allusions listed. (0) | Inqualified allusions listed; silly format. (6) | A few divert allusions listed. (7) | Well selected allusions used; inferior errors. (8) | Well selected allusions used; follows chasten format for listing; no errors. (10) |
| NOTE: Points obtain be deducted for language, syntax, and/or punctuation errors. Failure to adduce sources divertly or using inchasten protocol when citing sources and listing allusions is reason for sharp-end diminution. Failure to adduce sources obtain remainder in surrender for academic entireness reconsideration. |
