Minimum criteria
If any of the following criteria are not
met, the paper will receive a 0.0.
- Problem or question clearly concerned
with achievement motivation in education.
- Use of relevant theories and ideas
from assigned course readings.
- Use of material from outside readings
specifically related to your question or problem.
Scoring Rubric
If the paper meets the minimum criteria listed above,
I will use the rubric below to assign grades. The following descriptions
are "ideal-types" provided to give you a sense of the grading scheme. No
one paper will exactly fit any one description. These represent points
on a scale: intermediate grades will also be given. Each anchor description
begins with general characteristics for all papers. Additional descriptions
applicable to literature reviews and research proposals appears at the
end of each anchor description.
4.0 Problem/question clearly
described and relevant to achievement motivation in education.
Theories and ideas from multiple course readings are used
in ways appropriate to the problem/question. Course readings are central
to the analysis, argument, or position. Readings are used critically,
in the service of exploring the problem/question within the chosen structure
(see guidelines for research proposals, lit reviews, etc.) Paper makes connections
between course readings and outside readings.
Paper goes beyond class discussions/assigned readings
in important ways--extending the ideas and/or challenging them from additional
perspectives (your own, other authors'). The potential or actual contribution of your project
to what we know about this aspect of achievement motivation in education
is supported and clearly described. Implications for practice or future
research well-grounded in your project and clearly described.
Paper makes a coherent and well-supported argument
for a particular stance or interpretation, including consideration of
alternate viewpoints or interpretations, and drawing on both empirical
and theoretical work.
For literature reviews: review is focused but broad
enough to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers
on the issue. These positions are clearly described. Questions posed
for future research arise from the literature review.
For research proposals and case studies: Literature
review focused, sets up research problem, questions, and/or hypotheses well.
Analysis of data shows a good grasp of problem complexity and theoretical
implications.
3.5 Problem/question clearly
described and relevant to achievement motivation in education.
Theories and ideas from course readings are used in ways appropriate
to the problem/question. Course readings tend to be peripheral to
the analysis, argument, or position. Readings are used critically, in
the service of exploring the problem/question within the chosen structure.
Paper makes connections between course readings and outside readings.
Paper goes beyond class discussions/assigned readings in
important ways- extending the ideas and/or challenging them from additional
perspectives (your own, other authors'). Potential or actual contribution of your project to what
we know about this aspect of achievement motivation in education is described,
but connections to the paper's central arguments are usually clear.
Paper makes a coherent argument for a particular stance or
interpretation, including consideration of alternate viewpoints or interpretations.
Support for the argument is generally good, though support from either
empirical or theoretical work may be weak.
For literature reviews: review is focused but broad
enough to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers
on the issue, but these positions are not always clearly described or support
may be weak (see above). Questions posed for future research arise from
the literature review.
For research proposals and case studies: Literature
review focused, sets up research problem, questions, and/or hypotheses fairly
well, but the critical link between the literature and the research questions,
justifying their importance, may not be completely clear. Analysis of data
(or analysis plan) shows a good grasp of problem complexity and theoretical
implications.
3.0 Problem/question clearly
described and relevant to achievement motivation in education.
Use of theories and ideas from course readings appropriate
to the problem/question and the chosen structure. Readings are sometimes used
critically--review may include some summaries without regard to the strengths
or limitations of the sources. Paper uses outside materials, but does
not go beyond course materials in exploring the question/problem in
important ways.
Contributions and implications of the project clearly described,
but may not always be clearly supported. Paper makes an coherent argument,
but support is weak in spots; may fail to consider alternate viewpoints
or interpretations. For literature reviews: review may be somewhat unfocused
or too narrow to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers
on the issue OR these positions may not be clearly described. Connections
between literature reviewed and some questions posed for future research
may not be clear.
For research proposals and studies: Literature review
is somewhat unfocused, OR relationship to research problem, questions, and/or
hypotheses may not be clearly described. Analysis of data (or analysis plan)
shows a grasp of problem complexity and theoretical implications.
2.0 Problem/question described and
is relevant to achievement motivation in education but this may not be
clearly stated.
Use of theories/ideas from course generally appropriate,
but may show some misunderstandings. Use of readings tends to be uncritical
or minimal. Problem/question not thoroughly explored, or paper does not
make a coherent and well-supported argument.
For literature reviews: review is unfocused or
too narrow to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers
on the issue, or these positions not clearly described. Questions posed
for future research seem unconnected to the literature review.
For research proposals and studies: Literature
review is unfocused, or relationship to research problem, questions, and/or
hypotheses not clearly described. Analysis of data shows weak grasp of
problem complexity or theoretical implications.
1.0 Problem/question described, relevance
to achievement motivation in education may not be clearly stated.
Major misconceptions as demonstrated by misuse of theories,
ideas, or readings. Support for argument is weak or missing.
Back to top
|