Final Research Paper/Presentation
Criteria
Ratings
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
40 pts
Broad into.
Research in
context. Lit
review clear
and
appropriate
including their
methods and
results. Gap,
purpose and
extension
clear.
Question and
hypotheses
are clear and
testable.
Rationale for
study and
hypothesis is
clear and
logical.
Introduction
34.67 pts
Intro is broad
but the
context is not
entirely clear.
Previous
literature is
described, but
could be
clearer.
Purpose of the
study is
mentioned,
but is missing
essential
elements.
Research
question and
hypothesis are
noted but may
be missing
clarity and/or
may not be
testable.
Rationale is
given but is
not
completely
logical.
29.33 pts
Intro is too
specific.
Previous
literature
noted, but is
unclear
and/or off
topic. Purpose
of the study is
mentioned
but is unclear
and/or off
topic.
Hypothesis is
noted but is
either not
testable or is
not logical.
Rationale is
given but is
incomplete
and/or
illogical.
26.67 pts
Intro is
token. Lit
review is
token.
Purpose of
study is
token.
Hypothesis
and
rationale
are token.
0 pts
Totally
missing or
plagiarized
Pt
s
37
Final Research Paper/Presentation
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Method
50 pts
45 pts
40 pts
35 pts
0 pts
Noted are the
proposed # of
participants,
demographics,
and
participant
selection
procedure.
Materials
and/or
apparatus are
clearly
described so
that the study
could be
replicated.
Operational
definitions of
IV(s) and DV
are clear. If
self-created
materials,
procedures
are noted and
copy is
included in
appendix and
referenced in
methods text.
If published
materials,
they are
clearly cited.
Procedure
notes all steps
necessary for
Info on the
participants is
mostly
complete.
Materials
and/or
apparatus
description(s)
are mostly
clear.
Operational
definitions are
given but
could be
clearer.
Materials are
noted but are
missing some
essential
information.
IV
manipulation
and/or DV
measurement
could be
clearer. Other
essential info
is attempted
(describing
matching,
counterbalanci
ng, etc.).
Info on the
participants is
partially
present, with
most essential
info missing.
The
description of
materials
and/or
apparatus is
vague and/or
unclear. IV
manipulation
and/or DV
measurement
are noted but
are unclear
and/or vague.
Other
essential info
is missing.
The info
about
participant
s is token.
The info
about
materials/
apparatus
is token.
Procedure
discussion
is token.
Statistics
are token
and/or
incorrect
and/or
illogical.
Totally
missing or
plagiarized
47
Final Research Paper/Presentation
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
Title Page
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
References
other
researchers to
accurately
replicate
study. IV
manipulation
and DV
measurement
are clearly
noted. Other
essential info
is included
(matching,
counterbalanci
ng, etc.).
Statistics to be
used are
appropriate
and clearly
stated.
1 pts
Title page has
all required
elements and
is formatted
correctly.
5 pts
The paper
gives complete
bibliographic
information in
APA style for 4
relevant
journal
articles.
0.85 pts
Title page has
most required
elements and
only minor
errors in
formatting.
0.75 pts
Title page has
a few required
elements
and/or
formatting is
incorrect.
4.38 pts
The paper
gives complete
bibliographic
info for 4
relevant
journal
articles. Some
citations are
incorrectly
formatted.
3.75 pts
The paper
gives
incomplete or
incorrect
bibliographic
information
for 4 journal
articles, some
of which are
not
appropriate.
0.65 pts
Title page
is missing
essential
info
and/or is
poorly
formatted.
3.13 pts
The paper
gives
bibliograph
ic
informatio
n for <4
relevant
journal
articles.
0 pts
Totally
missing or
plagiarized
1
0 pts
Totally
missing or
plagiarized
5
Final Research Paper/Presentation
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
Outcome
4 pts
The paper has
page numbers,
is typed,
doubleConventions
spaced, and
well
organized.
Language is fit
for a scientific
paper. All
ideas are
clearly
articulated
and carefully
cited. There
are no
problems with
paragraph
format,
spelling,
punctuation,
grammar, etc.
Readable
copies of each
article are
submitted.
Total Points: 93.4/100
3.4 pts
A few
problems with
organization,
clarity or
conventions
should have
been fixed but
aren’t serious
enough to
distract the
reader.
Readable
copies of each
article are
submitted.
2.6 pts
Numerous
errors are
distracting but
do not
interfere with
meaning.
Copies of
some articles
are submitted.
2.2 pts
Frequent
problems
make the
paper hard
to
understan
d. Possible
plagiarism
risks the
appearanc
e of
cheating.
Copies of
articles are
not
submitted.
0 pts
Totally
missing or
plagiarized
3.
4