Fall 2020
BIO113 Proposal, First draft
Rubric for Research Proposal
Criteria
Point Value
Title Page
Background
Information
Hypothesis
Body:
Flow from
Background
Information to
Hypothesis to
Methods
Methods
Expected outcomes
Conclusions
Grammar and
Spelling
Annotated
Bibliography
Low
Middle
High
0.5
1.5
2.5
All components are not
included.
Evidence of only three items,
and/or missing student
contributions section.
Neither implicit nor explicit
Gives the reader information
reference is made to the topic on the general subject of the
or purpose of the subject
proposal.
being studied.
Hypotheses (testable
hypothesis and null
hypothesis) have been
omitted or greatly run-on.
Points Earned
Proposal title, your name, lab
section, date, and student
contributions are all present.
X1
Clearly and concisely gives an
attention getter that grabs the reader
and the groundwork is laid as to the
direction of the proposed research.
Sources are cited when specific
statements are made.
X4
Includes a discussion of the
problem, objectives, and
hypothesis. The hypothesis is
testable, and a null hypothesis is
presented. Sources are cited
when specific statements are
made.
There is a basic flow from the
The body goes from general ideas
Background Information to the to specific conclusions between
Hypothesis section to Methods the different sections. Transitions
section, but not all sections or
help the reader tie sections
paragraphs follow in a natural or together, as well as adjacent
logical order.
paragraphs.
X4
The author provides adequate
reasoning for the methods
chosen, but does not directly
define the dependent,
independent variables, and/or
controls, and/or statistical
testing, and/or timing of
experimentation.
The author provides exemplary
reasoning for the proposed
methodology and clearly defines
the independent and dependent
variables, and the control groups.
The author’s proposed statistical
testing is supported with
background research and duration
of experimentation is clearly
justified in the text.
Expected outcomes are clearly
Expected outcomes and
articulated, contain reasonable
predictions are presented, but
not clearly articulated and/or not predictions that are placed within
the framework of presented
presented alongside mock
background information, and are
tables/graphs.
illustrated with tables/graphs.
X3
Conclusions are not present
Conclusions are present, but
there is no discussion of how
these findings fit into the broader
scope of the field. No
implications mentioned.
X1
It is hard to know what the
writer is trying to express.
Writing is convoluted.
Misspelled words, incorrect
grammar, and improper
punctuation are evident.
Writing is generally clear, but
unnecessary words are
occasionally used. Meaning is
sometimes hidden.
Paragraph or sentence structure
is too repetitive. Few (3)
spelling, grammar, or
punctuation errors are made.
Done in correct format with
some errors. Includes less than
4 required references, mostly
from internet sources and not
peer-reviewed literature.
No direction, with
subtopics appearing
disjointed.
There is no indication the
author conducted adequate
investigation into the research
methods appropriate for the
hypothesis being tested.
Discussion of expected
outcomes is greatly
disjointed or not present.
Not in Vancouver format.
Includes 1 major references
(e.g. science journal
articles, books sources).
Both hypothesis and null
hypothesis are present, but
hypothesis is not testable or
explicit, as expected
Implications for potential
findings are communicated
effectively and convincingly,
with reference to presented
background information to
show the reader how their work
will move the science forward.
Writing is crisp, clear, and
succinct. No spelling,
grammar, or punctuation errors
are made.
X4
X1
X1
No errors in sentence structure
and word usage.
Done in proper format with no
errors. Includes the 4 required
references, all from peer reviewed
literature.
X1
TOTAL SCORE
/50