Skip to main content
iRubric: Portfolio Research Section - Scientific - Fall 2012 rubric

iRubric: Portfolio Research Section - Scientific - Fall 2012 rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Portfolio Research Section - Scientific - Fall 2012 
Portfolio Research Section - Scientific - Fall 2012
This is the rubric for grading scientific literature research in the Research section of the Student Portfolios in the Integrated Projects Curriculum of Messiah College Engineering Department. (v1.0, created 10/11 by BR, v2.0, revised 03/12 by BR, v2.1, revised 09/12 by TV)
Rubric Code: FXX8798
By mpurio
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Engineering  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Reflection
33.33 % Enter rubric description
  Exemplary/Excellent

5 pts

Accomplished/Good

4 pts

Developing/Fair

3 pts

Deficient/Poor

2 pts

Not Applicable

(N/A)

Setting / Context
1 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

References the project assignment and its relationship to the project goals, as well as the date of completion, timeliness of sub-mission, and co-workers.
Accomplished/Good

References the project assignment, date of completion, and co-workers involved.
Developing/Fair

References only the project assignment that lead to the portfolio entry.
Deficient/Poor

Does not describe the relationship of the portfolio entry with the overall project.
Not Applicable
Appearance
1 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Properly formatted word-processed document on “resume-quality” paper.
Accomplished/Good

Properly formatted word-processed document.
Developing/Fair

Neatly handwritten or unformatted type.
Deficient/Poor

Illegible or sloppy.
Not Applicable
Writing Mechanics
1 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Writing is free of grammatical and spelling errors.
Accomplished/Good

Writing is mostly free of grammatical and spelling errors.
Developing/Fair

Grammatical and spelling errors are present but do not detract from the reflection.
Deficient/Poor

Grammatical and spelling errors detract from the reflection. The FYS professor picks up the red pen to correct them…
Not Applicable
Reflection
2 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Summary, mastery of the category, and personal growth represented by the entry.
Accomplished/Good

Summary of the student’s contribution and an explanation of how the entry demonstrates the mastery of the category.
Developing/Fair

Pure summary of the student’s contribution to entry.
Deficient/Poor

Rambling gibberish. It appears the writer is trying to fill in empty space.
Not Applicable
Entry
66.67 %
  Exemplary/Excellent

5 pts

Accomplished/Good

4 pts

Developing/Fair

3 pts

Deficient/Poor

2 pts

Not Applicable

(N/A)

Topic Selection
1 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Topic of the paper is clearly defined. Research focus has been narrowed by specific criteria. The state-of-the-art may be clearly given within the paper's length.
Accomplished/Good

Topic is specific enough that the student can give proper treatment within the given length. Student may still need to narrow the focus by applying specific criteria to eliminate unnecessary information.
Developing/Fair

Student has narrowed the topic somewhat. Further research may lead to a better topic selection.
Deficient/Poor

Topic is very general and has no focus. Scope of the paper is so broad it is impossible to give proper treatment within the given length.
Not Applicable

Not Applicable
Content
4 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

All relevant papers are reviewed, from seminal early works to the latest current developments. The articles reviewed are clearly inter-related and build upon each other to show how we have progressed to the current state-of-the-art.
Accomplished/Good

A good general review of the literature is included, covering most of the seminal early papers and the most relevant current papers. Papers reviewed are cohesive and inter-related.
Developing/Fair

Not all the prior work was reviewed, and some of the seminal works were excluded. Articles reviewed had some relation to each other and to the chosen topic. Keyword search may need to be refined.
Deficient/Poor

Few articles were reviewed and many seminal papers were omitted. Research articles reviewed are scattered and unrelated. Student clearly did not filter out irrelevant articles and instead summarized the top "web hits".
Not Applicable

Not Applicable
Organization
2 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Ideas are arranged logically to support the purpose of the paper. Paragraphs contain one topic sentence, and supporting sentences clearly flow from one to the other. Paragraphs also are clearly linked to each other. The reader can easily follow the paper.
Accomplished/Good

Writing is logically organized to support the central purpose. Paragraphs contain only one main idea, with each paragraph supporting the others. There are occasional lapses in organization, but not enough to distract the reader.
Developing/Fair

In general, writing is logically organized. Occasionally paragraphs contain more than one main idea or contain sentences unrelated to the main idea. Some support and flow among paragraphs. Reader has a fairly clear idea of what the writer intends.
Deficient/Poor

Writing is not logically organized. Paragraphs lack topic sentences and may contain more than one major idea. Paragraphs and sentences do not support each other.
Not Applicable

Not Applicable
Sentence Structure
1 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Sentences are well-phrased and varied in length and structure. They flow smoothly from one to another.
Accomplished/Good

Sentences are well-phrased and there is some variety in length and structure. Flow from sentence to sentence is generally smooth.
Developing/Fair

Some sentences are awkwardly constructed so that the reader is occasionally distracted.
Deficient/Poor

Errors in sentence structure are frequent enough to be a major distraction to the reader
Not Applicable

Not Applicable
Grammar, spelling, punctuation
1 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Writing is free or almost free of errors.
Accomplished/Good

There are occasional errors, but they are not too distracting and do not obscure the meaning of the sentence.
Developing/Fair

Paper has many distracting errors. Perhaps some editing did occur.
Deficient/Poor

There are so many errors the meaning is obscured. Student obviously did not proof read the paper at all.
Not Applicable

Not Applicable
Use of References
1 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

Compelling evidence from legitimate sources are given. Attribution is clear and fairly represented.
Accomplished/Good

Professionally legitimate sources are generally present and attribution is, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. Student made a good effort at citing sources.
Developing/Fair

Although attributions are occasionally given, many statements seem unsubstantiated. Sources of information are unclear.
Deficient/Poor

Student failed to cite sources. Very few references given throughout paper, even though the content clearly did not originate from the student.
Not Applicable

Not Applicable
Quality of References
2 pts

Exemplary/Excellent

References are primarily peer-reviewed professional journals or other approved sources. Reader is confident that information and ideas can be trusted.
Accomplished/Good

Majority of the references cited are from peer-reviewed sources. Accuracy of some sources may not be verifiable but are generally regarded as legitimate. Minimal use of Wikipedia.
Developing/Fair

Most of the references are from sources that are not peer-reviewed. Accuracy of the material is unable to be substantiated.
Deficient/Poor

Virtually no professionally reliable sources. Random websites with no qualifications are references. The Wikipedia appeared to be the only source.
Not Applicable

Not Applicable



Keywords:
  • technical writing, literature review, science, engineering

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n16