1
Evaluated
Background
Context
Rationale
Objectives
10 Points
Study is not presented in a clear and
concise manner. Literature review
(Background) is unclear, written and
contains almost no elements of
organizing, synthesizing, and
evaluating. Purpose statement is
unclear, difficult to find, or missing.
Research problem contains many gaps
in understanding and logic. The
objectives were missing, or not
coherent with the points made in the
background, context, and rationale.
15 Points
Study is presented in a
somewhat clear and
concise manner.
Literature review
(Background) is unclear,
written and contains a
few elements of
organizing, synthesizing,
evaluating, and contains
some gaps in clarity
and/or flow. Purpose
statement is somewhat
unclear or vague, or
difficult to find. Research
problem is somewhat
mentioned, yet there were
some gaps in
understanding and logic.
The objectives were
vaguely mentioned,
missing, or slightly
coherent with the points
made in the background,
context, and rationale.
20 Points
Study is mainly presented
in a clear and concise
manner. Literature review
(Background) is mostly
clear, written, and
contains elements of
evaluating, synthesizing,
and organizing, and
contains minimal gaps in
clarity and/or flow.
Purpose statement is
mostly clear and easy to
find. Research problem is
mostly coherent, with
minimal gaps in
understanding and logic.
The objectives were
mentioned and were
slightly not coherent with
the points made in the
background, context, and
rationale.
25 Points
Study is presented in an
exceptionally clear
manner. Literature review
(Background) is clearly
written, and contains
elements of evaluating,
synthesizing, and
organizing, without gaps
in clarity and/or flow.
Purpose statement is
clear, succinct, and easy
to find. Research problem
is coherent. The
objectives were clearly
mentioned, coherent with
the points made in the
background, context, and
rationale.
2
Methodology
Methods
Results
Limitations
Dissemination
of
information
25 Points
Theoretical perspective is not
accurately described. Theoretical or
conceptual framework are missing or
described incorrectly. Methodology or
approach is not stated. Description of
methods is mostly unclear with several
gaps in understanding.
Almost all aspects of the research
design are incoherent and there is not a
clear indication of how one method will
build upon and connect to one another.
Data collection and analysis strategies
are not well developed and/or applied
improperly. Limitations and/or
implications are missing or
underdeveloped. Discussion of study’s
contribution/ dissemination is unclear
or not mentioned.
30 Points
Theoretical perspective is
somewhat accurately
described. Theoretical or
conceptual framework is
described but not
applicable or not
correctly applied based
on the methods presented.
Methodology or approach
is stated but mostly
disconnected from other
aspects of the study (not
completely connecting
with the methods or
purpose of the study).
Description of methods is
somewhat clear, with
some gaps in
understanding. Some
aspects of the research
design are coherent,
thorough, and concise,
and build upon and
connect to one another.
Data collection and
analysis strategies are
somewhat developed, and
vaguely applied.
Limitations and/or
implications are vaguely
mentioned. Discussion of
study’s contribution/
dissemination is mostly
unclear or vaguely
mentioned.
40 Points
Theoretical perspective is
mostly accurately
described. Theoretical or
conceptual framework is
described and slightly not
applicable, based on the
methods presented.
Methodology or approach
is stated and is mostly
connected to other
aspects. Description of
methods is mostly clear
and concise, containing a
minimal gap in
understanding. Almost all
aspects of the research
design are coherent,
thorough, and concise,
and build upon and
connect to one another.
Data collection and
analysis strategies are
mostly adequately
described, developed, and
applied. Limitations
and/or implications are
somewhat mentioned.
Discussion of study’s
contribution/
dissemination is also
mostly clear and
mentioned.
50 Points
Theoretical perspective is
accurately described.
Theoretical or conceptual
framework is described
and applicable, based on
the methods presented.
Methodology or approach
is stated and strongly
connected to other
aspects. Description of
methods is clear and
concise. All aspects of the
research design are
coherent, thorough, and
concise, and build upon
and connect to one
another. Data collection
and analysis strategies are
adequately described and
clear. Limitations and/or
implications are
adequately described.
Discussion of study’s
contribution/
dissemination is also
clear and mentioned.
3
Writing
presentation
10 Points
Attempts to use consistent system and
organization, yet slides are not
presenting a logical flow or progression
between ideas. Writing is not clearly
visibly concise, or easy to read. Slides
have too much information per slide.
Writing is disorganized and unclear due
to a lack of organizing mechanisms
(e.g., advanced organizers, headings
and subheadings) and transitions
between points. APA style not followed
throughout presentation (in text
citations, references).
15 Points
Some use of a consistent
system and organization,
with slides presenting a
somewhat logical flow or
progression between
ideas. Writing is slightly
concise, or easy to read.
Some slides have too
much or too little
information per slide,
reducing clarity and
consistent flow between
slides. Writing is
somewhat organized and
clear due to slight use of
organizing mechanisms
(e.g., advanced
organizers, headings, and
subheadings) and
transitions between
points. APA style is
somewhat followed
throughout presentation
(in text citations,
references).
20 Points
Demonstrates consistent
system and organization,
with slides presenting a
logical flow or
progression between
ideas. Writing is slightly
concise, or easy to read.
Most slides have a
balanced amount of
information per slide,
resulting in clarity and
consistent flow between
slides. Writing is
organized and clear with
the use of some
organizing mechanisms
(e.g., advanced
organizers, headings, and
subheadings) and
transitions between
points. APA style is
followed throughout
presentation (in text
citations, references).
25 Points
Demonstrates consistent
system and organization,
with slides presenting a
logical flow or
progression between
ideas. Writing is attention
to detail, clear, concise,
or easy to read. Slides
have a balanced amount
of information, that are
pertinent per slide,
resulting in clarity and
consistent flow between
slides. Writing is
organized and clear with
the use organizing
mechanisms (e.g.,
advanced organizers,
headings, and
subheadings) presented
from the start to the end
of slides, with excellent
transitions between
points. APA style is
followed throughout
presentation (in text
citations, references).
4
Comments:
Grade: