Assignment- Doctorate Level- Please READ Entire Post First!!!

1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%

2
Less than Satisfactory
74.00%

3
Satisfactory
79.00%

4
Good
87.00%

5
Excellent
100.00%

70.0 %Content

20.0 %Summary of Foundational and Current Research

The summary of foundational and current research is not provided.

The summary of foundational and current research is provided, but it is incomplete or irrelevant to the topic of the study.

The summary of foundational and current research is provided and accurate though cursory.

The summary of foundational and current research is provided, accurate, and thoughtful.

The summary of foundational and current research is provided, accurate, and insightful.

20.0 %Identification of a Gap in the Literature

A gap in the reviewed literature is not presented.

A gap in the reviewed literature is presented but is not relevant or accurate.

A gap in the reviewed literature is presented and is relevant and accurate though naive.

A gap in the reviewed literature is presented and is relevant, accurate, and thoughtful.

A gap in the reviewed literature is presented and is relevant, accurate, and discerning.

20.0 %Evidence in Support of or Opposition to the Reviewed Literature

Evidence in support of or opposition to the reviewed literature is not presented.

Evidence in support of or opposition to the reviewed literature is presented. However, the argument used is not valid.

Evidence in support of or opposition to the reviewed literature is presented. The argument employed is valid though cursory.

Evidence in support of or opposition to the reviewed literature is presented. The argument employed is valid and thoughtful.

Evidence in support of or opposition to the reviewed literature is presented. The argument employed is valid and persuasive.

10.0 %Synthesis and Argument

No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources.

Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. The synthesis and argument in the paper are of publication caliber.

25.0 %Organization and Effectiveness

20.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. The development indicated by the thesis and/or main claim is acceptable for publication.

5.0 %Mechanics of Writing

Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

5.0 %Format

5.0 %APA Format

Required format is rarely followed correctly. An appropriate number of topic-related scholarly research sources and related in-text citations is not present. No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Required format is attempted, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Some included sources are not scholarly research or topic-related. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

Required format is used correctly, although some minor errors may be present. Scholarly research sources are present and topic-related, but the source and quality of some references is questionable. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

Required format is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. Scholarly research accounts for the majority of sources presented and is topic-related and obtained from reputable professional sources. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

The document is correctly formatted to publication standards. All research presented is scholarly, topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. The paper could readily be accepted for publication.

100 %Total Weightage