Paper 6

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
EDL-805 EDL-805-O500 Evaluating the relative effectiveness of a variety of collaborative approaches 253.0
Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%) Satisfactory (79.00%) Good (87.00%) Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned
Content 70.0%
Make a convincing argument that collaboration is available without impinging of classroom time. 55.0% Argument that collaboration time is available without impinging on classroom or other activity time is not clearly present. Support of claims is not convincing. Personal experience, observation, or scholarly research are not provided. Arguments provided do not support claims. Argument that collaboration time is available without impinging on classroom or other activity time is vague or not clearly present. Support of claims is not convincing. Either personal experience, observation, or scholarly research is not provided. What is present does not support claims. Argument that collaboration time is available without impinging on classroom or other activity time is present but is not convincing. Personal experience, observation, and scholarly research are provided but may not support claims. Argument that collaboration time is available without impinging on classroom or other activity time is present. Personal experience, observation, and scholarly research are provided and support claims. Argument that collaboration time is available without impinging on classroom or other activity time is present, distinctive, and compelling. Personal experience, observation, and scholarly research are provided but may not support claims. Research is authoritative
Abstract 15.0% Abstract does not follow guidelines in content or structure. Abstract follows assignment guidelines in either content or structure. Abstract follows assignment guidelines in content and structure. Abstract follows assignment guidelines in content and structure. Content is well detailed. Abstract follows assignment guidelines in content and structure. Content is comprehensive.
Organization and Effectiveness 20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose 7.0% Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction 8.0% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses unreliable sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format 10.0%
Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5.0% Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% No reference page is included. No citations are used. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
Total Weightage 100%