Skip to main content

iRubric: Grant Proposal Project rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Grant Proposal Project 
Grant Proposal Project
Rubric Code: BBA845
By profearroyo
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: (General)  
Type: Project  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate, Graduate

Powered by iRubric Grant Proposal
  Poor

1 pts

Fair

3 pts

Good

5 pts

Literature Review
15 %

Poor

Much of the literature does not relate to the problem statement as expressed in research questions and objectives.
Fair

Some of the literature review is only peripherally related to the problem statement as expressed in research questions and objectives. It is not entirely on target.
Good

Review is clearly related to the problem statement as expressed in research questions and objectives. It is both interesting and on target.
Aims & Objectives
10 %

The project purpose is clear and follows guidelines provided.
Poor

Aims are provided but they are inconsistent with the rationale of the proposal.
Fair

Aims require further refinement. They are consistent with the rationale of the proposal, but are lacking in the precision required to state a concrete, executable aim.
Good

Aims are clear, concise, simple and consistent with the rationale of the proposal. The aims are precise.
Project Goal
5 %

The project goal is well stated and can be implemented within the time lines of the grant proposal.
Poor

The project goal is poorly stated and/or it can not be implemented within the time lines of the grant proposal.
Fair

The project goal is incompletely stated and/or it may not be able to be implemented within the time lines of the grant proposal.
Good

The project goal is well stated and can be implemented within the time lines of the grant proposal.
Project Design
15 %

The design of the project is sound and appropriate resources are identified for its completion.
Poor

The design of the project is questionable. Resources are identified for its completion may available.
Fair

The design of the project is adequate and resources are identified for its completion.
Good

The design of the project is sound and appropriate resources are identified for its completion.
Significance and innovation
5 %

The project contributes addresses a current need and is novel.
Poor

Significance and innovation not compelling to the funding body and not distinct from the outcomes.
Fair

The distinction between significance and outcomes is somewhat blurred, or the significance is far from compelling, is more cursory than convincing and therefore needs to be strengthened.
Good

The distinction between the significance and outcomes is clearly appreciated. The significance is on the right track.
Method of data collection
15 %

Methodology is adequate to accomplish the goals proposed and in line with ethical and professional standards.
Poor

Omits a number of parts of the method of data collection including most central considerations. The method described is insufficiently resolved, misdirected and/or incomplete. The reader does not feel they can be sure the researcher has identified a feasible and robust method for collecting the data required to address the research aims.
Fair

Omits some central considerations of the data collection method. Those parts of the method which are covered need to be expressed more clearly.
Good

Specifies appropriate data collection methods making it clear to the reader that they have selected the right tools to collect the data required, that they have a practical procedure for collecting that data and having it returned by the research team, that consent is considered and managed, that the data needed is available, that the format of data collection (online survey, interview, observation etc) is appropriate.
Project Timeline
5 %

The time line for the project is complete and specific. Responsibility for tasks has been assigned.
Poor

The time line for the project is incomplete and not specific. Responsibility for tasks has not been assigned.
The time line is not reasonable for the tasks assigned.
Fair

The time line for the project is complete but not specific. Responsibility for tasks may not have been assigned.
Good

The time line for the project is complete and specific and reasonable for the tasks assigned. Responsibility for tasks has been delegated.
OVERALL
Headings & sections
5 %

Document organization guidelines were followed adequately.
Poor

Headings and subheadings are missing.
Fair

Uses headings and subheadings that do not entirely fit the subject matter or the need to direct the reader.
Good

Mostly uses appropriate levels of headings and subheadings that fit the specific subject matter.
Orienting paragraph / Abstract
5 %

The grant includes an orienting paragraph (executive summary / abstract) that provides an adequate summary of the proposed research.
Poor

The orienting paragraph does not serve the purpose of providing a brief introduction to the proposal. The reader can not form a general appreciation for the direction the grant proposal will take.
Fair

Orienting paragraph is not well organized and important information is difficult to locate or is expressed in a manner such that it is difficult to comprehend. The reader can form a general appreciation for the direction the proposal will take, but it is not clear or logical.
Good

The proposal begins with a brief paragraph that quickly introduces the reader to the topic: (1) identifying the background of the problem, (2) a statement of the problem, (3) an indication of the significance or need for their study. The reader is provided with a clear, concise and logical overview of the direction the grant proposal will take.
Grammar & Vocabulary
20 %

Poor

- Paper contains numerous grammatical errors.
-Meaning blocked as text dominated by errors.
-Range of vocabulary extremely limited.
-English interference frequent.
Fair

- Paper contains few grammatical errors.
- Language lacks clarity at times.
-Vocabulary accurate but may be somewhat limited.
-Some areas of English interference may be present but meaning rarely obscured.
Good

Wide range of structures with few or no significant errors.
- Rules of grammar and vocabulary usage followed.
- Language is clear and precise; sentences display consistently strong, varied structure.
-Little or no evidence of English interference.




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.

n224