iRubric: Paper comparing three neuroscientists rubric

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

Paper comparing three neuroscientists

General Psychology Paper

Paper comparing three neuroscientists

Rubric Code: T3CW4X

By mbasham

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Psychology

Type: Writing

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Overall
	F-D 69-0 pts This paper needs a lot of work and is either a near failing paper or a paper that needs to be entirely redesigned/reorganized and rewritten. (N/A)	B-C 89-70 pts This is a paper that is working for the most part, but still reads more like a rough draft than a completed essay. (N/A)	A 100-90 pts This paper reads like a finished product. The writing has been edited, stylized, and completed with a total awareness of the assignment, structure, formatting and audience. (N/A)
Organization & Structure
	Almost Fair/Poor (9-0 pts) (N/A)	Good/Fair (15-10 pts) (N/A)	Excellent/Good (20-16 pts) (N/A)
Organization & Structure 20 pts	Almost Fair/Poor (9-0 pts) - Lack of organization and structure. - Paragraphs disjointed and lack an awareness of transition of thoughts. - Topic sentences missing or unclear. - Supporting sentences too lengthy/wordy, or repetitive.	Good/Fair (15-10 pts) - Structure of the paragraphs are not easy to follow. - Paragraph transitions need improvement. -Sentences need more attention to purpose and clarity.	Excellent/Good (20-16 pts) - good topic sentences throughout - Structure of the paragraphs is clear and easy to follow.
Theories and Theorists
	Almost Fair/Poor (9-0 pts) (N/A)	Good/Fair (15-10 pts) (N/A)	Excellent/Good (20-16 pts) (N/A)
Major Theories and Theorists 20 pts	Almost Fair/Poor (9-0 pts) Less than three major theorists are presented. theorists are presented, but minimally discussed. - Content is incomplete. - Major contribution of each neuroscientist is unclear - Unclear if writer understands the assignment.	Good/Fair (15-10 pts) All three major theorists are presented and adequately discussed. - Content is not comprehensive - Major contributions are mentioned but are somewhat undefined or unclear.	Excellent/Good (20-16 pts) theorists are presented and extensively discussed. - Content is comprehensive and accurate. - Major Ideas and concepts are presented in a clear and understandable manner.
Research
	Almost Fair/Poor (3-0 pts) (N/A)	Good/Fair (6-3 pts) (N/A)	Excellent/Good (10-7 pts) (N/A)
Research 10 pts	Almost Fair/Poor (3-0 pts) Less than 3 sources. References are not from academic sources.	Good/Fair (6-3 pts) Minimal number of sources. Some references are from academic sources, but some are not	Excellent/Good (10-7 pts) Well referenced paper with adequate number of sources. Nearly all references are from academic sources.
Paper Length
	Almost Fair/Poor (3-0 pts) (N/A)	Good/Fair (6-3 pts) (N/A)	Excellent/Good (10-7 pts) (N/A)
Paper Length 10 pts	Almost Fair/Poor (3-0 pts) Paper is not an appropriate length	Good/Fair (6-3 pts) Paper is an appropriate lenght, but content appears to have been added to increase page length.	Excellent/Good (10-7 pts) Paper is of an appropriate length and content appears to be relevant and contributes to the paper.
APA format
	APA not attempted (0 pts (N/A)	APA attempted (3.5 pts) APA attempted, but some mistakes (N/A)	correct APA format (5) (N/A)
APA 5 pts	APA not attempted (0 pts Not attempted	APA attempted (3.5 pts)	correct APA format (5) Attempted

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric