Search within:

Appendix A: TE Doctoral Rubric

Depth and Integration of Knowledge
 
ProficientSatisfactoryWeakUnacceptable
  •  Exhibits an in-depth understanding of the subject/course matter, pertinent literature, and the relationships among material obtained from all cited sources.
  • Arguments are fully developed and supported by relevant evidence and sources.
  • Demonstrates in-depth understanding of theoretical concepts and their relationships.
  • Displays adequate analysis and critique of relevant research literature. All points are addressed individually and linked appropriately.
  • Displays advanced synthesis of the literature by appropriately interconnecting and extending key ideas from all sources,
  • Exhibits understanding of subject/course matter, pertinent literature, and the relationship among material obtained from all cited sources.
  • Arguments are mostly well-developed and supported by relevant evidence and sources.
  • Demonstrates adequate understanding of theoretical concepts.
  • Displays some analysis and critique of relevant research literature. Most points are addressed individually and sufficiently linked.
  • Displays adequate synthesis of the literature by mostly interconnecting key ideas from all sources
  • Exhibits a limited understanding of subject/course matter, pertinent literature, and the relationship among material obtained from all cited sources.
  • Arguments are underdeveloped and/or supported by minimal evidence and sources.
  • Demonstrates minimal understanding of theoretical concepts.
  • Displays limited analysis and critique of relevant research literature. Few points are addressed individually or they are insufficiently linked.
  • Displays limited synthesis of the literature by summarizing the content and ineffectively interconnecting key ideas from sources
  • Exhibits critical weakness in understanding of subject/course matter, pertinent literature, and the relationship among material obtained from all cited sources.
  • Arguments are weak, inconsistent, or unconvincing.
  • Demonstrates critical errors in the understanding of theoretical concepts.
  • Displays no analysis of relevant research literature. Points are not addressed individually and are The paper not linked.
  • Displays no synthesis of the literature by summarizing content without interconnecting key ideas.
Sources & APA Format
ProficientSatisfactoryWeakUnacceptable
  • Excellent use of APA format.
  • Appropriate sources are used.
  • Documentation is excellent with all data and direct quotes obtained from other sources properly cited in-text and in the reference list.
  • Demonstrates appropriate originality. No plagiarism.
  • Adequate use of APA format.
  • Mostly appropriate sources are used.
  • Documentation is strong with most data and direct quotes obtained from other sources properly cited in-text and in the reference list.
  • Demonstrates acceptable originality. No plagiarism.
  • Inadequate use of APA format.
  • Few appropriate sources are used.
  • Documentation is inconsistent or most data and direct quotes obtained from other sources are not properly cited.
  • Demonstrates acceptable originality. Possible plagiarism.
  • Unacceptable use of APA format.
  • Inappropriate sources are used.
  • In-text citations and reference lists contain many errors.
  • Documentation is lacking and citations are absent.
  • Demonstrates unacceptable originality. Has plagiarized from other sources.
Structure & Organization
ProficientSatisfactoryWeakUnacceptable
  • Structure and organization are strong.
  • The introduction & conclusion are effective.
  • The paragraphs are well-developed.
  • Paragraphs have strong topic sentences.
  • Development is logical and clear to the reader.
  • Paper flows from one issue to the next. The use of transitions and headings is appropriate.
  • Structure and organization are adequate.
  • The Introduction and conclusion are competent.
  • Paragraphs are developed competently but maybe occasionally underdeveloped.
  • Topic sentences are generally good.
  • Development is logical and clear to the reader.
  • Paper flows with only minor disjointedness. Use of transitions and headings is mostly appropriate.
  • Structure and organization are flawed. 
  • The introduction or conclusion is missing.
  • Paragraphs are underdeveloped or are developed inadequately or inconsistently.
  • Topic sentences are missing or are present but ineffective.
  • Development is flawed or unclear to the reader (reasoning isn’t sound).
  • The paper flow is disjointed. Headings are used as primary means of linking concepts.
  • Structure and organization are ineffective.
  • The introduction and conclusion are missing.
  • Paragraphs are undeveloped.
  • Topic sentences are missing.
  • Development is missing or otherwise unacceptable.
  • The paper does not flow and appears to be created from disparate issues. Headings and transitions are absent.

 

Writing Style, Grammar, and Mechanics
ProficientSatisfactoryWeakUnacceptable
  • Sentences are consistently clear, concise, and direct.
  • The tone is appropriately formal/informal.
  • Writing is strong with no errors in grammar & mechanics present.
  • Sentences are generally clear, concise, and direct.
  • The tone is mostly appropriately formal/informal.
  • The writing is clear. Errors in grammar & mechanics do not impair meaning (2 errors per page)
  • Sentences are generally wordy and/or ambiguous.
  • The tone is inconsistent.
  • The writing is somewhat clear. Errors in grammar & mechanics impair meaning (3-5 errors per page)
  • Sentences are unclear enough to impair meaning.
  • The tone is inappropriate.
  • The writing is unclear.Errors in grammar & mechanics severely impact meaning (at least 6 errors per page).