Mr. Baum – Math Research
5
The paper had a sharp, distinct
focus and well-defined question
Does the
paper
answer the
question?
Content
The scope of the paper was
excellent, considering both the
topic and page constraints
The paper leads to a complete
and sensible answer of the
research question and includes
a discussion of the limitations of
the answer
The paper had substantial,
specific and illustrative content
(equations, tables, graphics, or
other content) to support the
answer to the research
question.
The project contained no
mathematical errors.
Flow
Writing
Conventions
and Style
Scoring Rubric for the Research Paper
4
The paper had a sharp,
distinct focus and welldefined question
The scope of the paper
was excellent, considering
both the topic and page
constraints
The paper leads to a
complete and sensible
answer to the research
question.
The paper had specific
and illustrative content to
support the answer to the
research question.
The paper contained no or
very few and minor
mathematical errors.
3
The paper had
adequate focus and
stated a clear
question
The scope of the
paper was somewhat
limited, considering
both the topic and
length of the paper.
The paper leads to a
reasonable answer of
the research
question.
The paper had
sufficient content to
support the answer
to the research
question.
The paper contained
limited to several
minor mathematical
errors.
2
1
The paper had vague
focus.
The paper had no or little
focus
The scope of the
presentation was very
limited, considering both
the topic and length of
the paper.
The scope of the paper
was inappropriate.
Answer is not stated or
unjustified
The paper states a
plausible answer to the
research question that is
not fully justified
The paper had limited
content to support the
answer to the research
question.
The paper contained
many minor mathematical
errors or a major
mathematical error.
The paper had an absence
of relevant content.
The paper contained
substantial mathematical
errors.
There was unity, coherence and
inherent logic in the sequence
of ideas.
There was a logical and
appropriate sequence to
the paper.
There was a
generally logical
sequence to the
paper.
The lack of sequential
flow seriously interfered
with the objective of the
paper.
There was no logical
sequence to the flow of
ideas.
Writing flows smoothly and
concisely. Consistently employs
precise vocab. No distracting
errors in spelling, grammar, or
formatting. Sources are cited
properly
Writing flows smoothly,
avoiding weak,
unnecessary words.
Sources are cited
properly. Errors do not
interfere with
understanding
Writing is intelligible,
if at time imprecise
or redundant.
Sources are cited.
Errors may distract the
reader at times. Sources
may not be cited properly.
Not enough thought was
given to formatting and
editing.
Writing is confusing. Ideas
are referenced without
proper citation.