iRubric: Scientific Journal Review rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

Scientific Journal Review

To be used to evaluate a 4 page summary and criitique of a scientific article for a class in evaluation of scientific literature

Rubric Code: NX4C692

By pinkadobe

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Science

Type: Writing

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Scientific Journal Written Review
	Beginning 1 pts	Developing 3 pts	Proficient 4 pts
Introduction	Beginning Goal/hypothesis missing or incomplete. Background information includes unrelated information and/or is insufficient to support hypothesis. No previous work cited.	Developing Goal/hypothesis mentioned but unclear or confusing. Background information included but not sufficient to support hypothesis: only 1 article of previous work cited. Organized from broad to specific with respect to the topic.	Proficient Describes goal/hypothesis of experiment. Background information provides context for experimental question: 2 articles of previous work cited. Organized from broad to specific with respect to the topic.
Methods	Beginning Describes experimental procedure excluding some materials and how they are used Provides a general description of the experiment with little detail, making it difficult for a reader to repeat the experiment. Not written in narrative (paragraph) form.	Developing Describes experimental procedure including materials used Provides enough information for someone to infer how to do the experiment, but details may be unclear. Not written in narrative (paragraph) form.	Proficient Describes experimental procedure including materials used No results included. Provides enough detail for someone to repeat the experiment from the instructions. Written in narrative (paragraph) form.
Results and Discussion	Beginning Results incompletely presented in narrative form. Explanation loosely relates to results collected. Conclusion not made with respect to goal/hypothesis.	Developing Results are presented in narrative form. Original goal/hypothesis mentioned, but unclear how results relate.	Proficient Results are presented in narrative form. Addresses results with respect to original goal/hypothesis. Addresses variability of data. Results interpreted and explanations offered for trends or patterns as well as anomalies in the data.
Critique	Beginning Shows little understanding of article. No input offered on quality of study; whether it was well done or could it be improved. No reference of future studies or unanswered questions.	Developing Shows some understanding of article. Incomplete assessment of quality of study.	Proficient Shows understanding of article and subject matter. Poses further questions to continue research or address concerns with previous project. Connects projects to broader topics within biology.
Format, Style and References	Beginning Some/all of narrative written in present or future tense. Many grammar and spelling errors present. Few references cited from text listed. May be listed in correct format as per APA.	Developing All narrative written in past tense. Several grammar and spelling errors present. References cited include most sources cited in text. May be listed in correct format as per APA.	Proficient All narrative written in past tense. Minimal to no errors in grammar and spelling. References cited include all sources in text, listed in correct APA format.

Keywords:

Scientific Method, Writing

Subjects:

Types:

Writing

Discuss this rubric