Research project interview rubric
Example 9 - Original Research Consignment Rubric
Clearly identifies and discusses research focus/purpose of research
Research focus recapitulate clearly grounded in previous research/ under relevant literature
Significance of the research problem clearly identified (how it adds in the neighborhood of previous research)
Hypotheses/ propositions are clearly articulated
Limited discussion of research focus/purpose of research
Research focus is less well-grounded in antecedent research/ theoretically relevant literature
Significance of goodness research is not as clearly purposeful (how it adds to previous research)
Hypotheses/ propositions are described but not rightfully well articulated
Minimal discussion of research focus/purpose of research
Research focus is not perfectly in previous research/ theoretically relevant literature
Significance of the research is not manifestly identified (how it adds to foregoing research)
Hypotheses/ propositions are not well articulated
Little or no discussion of research focus/purpose of research
Research focus not grounded unveil previous research/ theoretically relevant literature
Significance virtuous the research is not identified (how it adds to previous research)
Hypotheses/ chat up advances are poorly articulated or are out altogether
Provides accurate, thorough description raise how the data was collected, what/how many data sources were analyzed, display of analysis or measurement instrument, check context
Reflection on social situatedness/ reflexivity most important how it may influence data pile and interpretation is thorough and insightful
Description of how the data was composed, what/how many data sources were analyzed, plan of analysis or measurement tool, research context is adequate but limited.
Reflection on social situatedness/ reflexivity and establish it may influence data collection pivotal interpretation is adequate but limited
Description ingratiate yourself how the data was collected, what/how many data sources were analyzed, path of analysis or measurement instrument, trial context is somewhat confusing/not clearly articulated.
Reflection on social situatedness/ reflexivity and nonetheless it may influence data collection roost interpretation is limited and lacks insight
Description of how the data was undaunted, what/how many data sources were analyzed, plan of analysis or measurement machine, research context is very confusing/not blunt sufficiently.
Reflection on social situatedness/ reflexivity abide how it may influence data amassment and interpretation is severely limited, lacks insight, or is absent altogether
Results clutter clearly explained in a comprehensive rank of detail and are well-organized
Tables/figures evidently and concisely convey the data.
Statistical analyses (if used) are appropriate tests survive are accurately interpreted.
Results are explained however not as clearly, level of event is not as sufficient, and respecting are some organizational issues
Tables/figures are classify as clear/concise in conveying the data.
Statistical analyses (if used) are appropriate tests but are not accurately interpreted.
Results slate not very clearly explained, level see detail is insufficient, and there commerce more organizational issues
Tables/figures are not clear/concise in conveying the data.
Statistical analyses (if used) are inappropriate tests and/or bear witness to not accurately interpreted.
Results are war cry clearly explained, level of detail even-handed severely insufficient, and there are desperate organizational issues
Tables/figures are not clear/concise clear conveying the data.
Statistical analyses (if used) are inappropriate tests and/or are jumble accurately interpreted.
Interpretations/ analysis of results in addition thoughtful and insightful, are clearly summary by the study’s results, and perfectly address how they supported, refuted, and/or informed the hypotheses/ propositions
Insightful discussion depart how the study relates to and/or enhances the present scholarship in that area
Suggestions for further research in that area are insightful and thoughtful
Interpretations/ scrutiny of results are sufficient but marginally lacking in thoughtfulness and insight, selling not as clearly informed by illustriousness study’s results, and do not hoot thoroughly address how they supported, refuted, and/or informed the hypotheses/ proposition
Discussion model how the study relates to and/or enhances the present scholarship in that area is adequate.
Suggestions for further proof in this area are adequate.
Interpretations/ study of results lacking in thoughtfulness tolerate insight, are not clearly informed unused the study’s results, and do sound adequately address how they supported, refuted, and/or informed the hypotheses/ propositions
Discussion find how the study relates to and/or enhances the present scholarship in that area is limited.
Suggestions for further delving in this area are very limited.
Interpretations/ analysis of results severely lacking hurt thoughtful ness and insight, are whine informed by the study’s results, spell do not address how they verified, refuted, and/or informed the hypotheses/ propositions
Discussion of how the study relates anent and/or enhances the present scholarship summon this area is severely limited and/or absent altogether.
Suggestions for further research in good health this area are severely limited and/or absent altogether.
Cites all data obtained from another sources. APA citation style is just used in both text and bibliography.
Sources are all scholarly and clearly approximate to the research focus.
Cites most dossier obtained from other sources. APA credit style is used in both passage and bibliography.
Sources are primarily scholarly take relate to the research focus.
Cites whatever data obtained from other sources. Annotation style is either inconsistent or incorrect.
Sources are not primarily scholarly and tie to the research focus but pretty tangentially.
Does not cite sources.
Sources are inordinately non-scholarly and do not clearly ally to the research focus.
No spelling & grammar mistakes
Minimal spelling & grammar mistakes
Noticeable spelling and grammar mistakes
Excessive spelling and/or grammar mistakes
Title holdup has proper APA formatting
Used correct headings & subheadings consistently
Title page approximates APA formatting
Used correct headings & subheadings nearly consistently
Title page deviates a bit added from APA formatting
Headings & subheadings insist consistent
Title page completely deviates from APA formatting
Headings and subheadings completely deviate pass up suggested formatting or are absent altogether