Methods Paper COM 300: Assessment Rubric
Criteria
Excellent (5-4.5 points):
Excellent to superior work in all
areas as indicated in the
instructors’ written expectations;
exemplary performance,
participation, creativity and
writing; fully addresses the
criterion; excellent grasp of facts,
analysis and application;
consistently clear statements and
explanations
Points
Good: (4 points): Good to fair
work in most aspects; minor
deficiency in relation to
instructors’ written expectations
regarding content, writing style or
procedures; adequate grasp of
facts, analysis, and practical
application; clear statements and
explanations are limited, but
above average quality
Comments
Average: (3.5 points): Passing
work, but in serious need of
improvement in many areas,
especially in regard to form and
content; minimal grasp of facts,
analysis and application; very few
clear statements or explanations
Introductory Section
Introductory section began by justifying importance of topic
to the communication field (see Reinard, p. 120)
Introductory section cited at least 6 scholarly sources in the
field
Sources cited were relevant and authoritative
Introductory section ended by specifically previewing the
main points of the paper
Introduction section featured no writing/format inconsistent
with the APA 5th style guide; overall quality of writing
“How Researchers Study Your Topic” Section
Overview of how others have studied your topic (and closely
related or similar topics where appropriate) focused on
specific quantitative and qualitative methods of research as
discussed in the textbook
Discussed recommendations others have made regarding
methods for studying the area
Discussed methodological limitations others have
highlighted in studying your area
“How Researchers Study Your Topic” section featured no
writing/format inconsistent with the APA 5th style guide;
overall quality of writing
Method Section
Clearly identified and justified the research method chosen
to answer your research problem statement
Described the step-by-step process/procedure for practicing
the research method chosen
Discussion of who your research subjects (or texts) will be
Discussion of how you will sample from the population
identified
Key terms to be defined were clearly indicated, and they
were the proper ones to be defined
Conceptual definitions were clearly described
Explained why you are adopting the proposed conceptual
definitions. Use the standards for conceptual definitions
found in chapter 3 of Reinard’s text to critique the definitions
Operational definitions were clearly described
Explained why you were adopting the proposed operational
definitions. Use the standards for operational found in
chapter 3 of Reinard’s text to critique the definitions
Summary of a reasonable position on the definitional issues
Discussed advantages (strengths) and disadvantages
(weaknesses) and any limitations of using the particular
Below Average (less than 3.5
points): confusing, lacks
explanation or completion; little
conforming to instructors’ written
expectations regarding content,
writing style or procedures;
overall, below professional quality
standards; not quality work
method as it relates to answering your question and
proposing future research
Sources cited in the Methods section were authoritative and
relevant
Methods section featured no writing/format inconsistent with
the APA 5th style guide; overall quality of writing
Concluding Section
Concluding section began with a summary of the points in
the paper regarding research methods
Concluding section ended with a single bottom line
statement of the notion found in the paper
Concluding section featured no writing/format inconsistent
with the APA 5th style guide; overall quality of writing
Other
Total number of pages (7-9)
References
Excellent (10-9 points):
Excellent to superior work in all
areas as indicated in the
instructors’ written expectations;
exemplary performance,
participation, creativity and
writing; fully addresses the
criterion; excellent grasp of facts,
analysis and application;
consistently clear statements and
explanations
Good: (8 points): Good to fair
work in most aspects; minor
deficiency in relation to
instructors’ written expectations
regarding content, writing style or
procedures; adequate grasp of
facts, analysis, and practical
application; clear statements and
explanations are limited, but
above average quality
Reference section in proper APA 5th form
Total number of references (20 references) – good variety,
quality
TOTAL POINTS
Average: (7 points): Passing
work, but in serious need of
improvement in many areas,
especially in regard to form and
content; minimal grasp of facts,
analysis and application; very few
clear statements or explanations
/150
Final comments
Below Average (less than 7
points): confusing, lacks
explanation or completion; little
conforming to instructors’ written
expectations regarding content,
writing style or procedures;
overall, below professional quality
standards; not quality work