Sheet1
MSITM 6320 AGILE PROJECT MANAGEMENT – RESEARCH ARTICLE REVIEW RUBRIC
SNO Standards Weight Rating Glorious Good Honest Beneath Proficient
1 Content material of Assessment 40% In depth Assessment of the content material (all main factors mentioned). Glorious abstract. Communicates the important thing concepts/themes/findings with a excessive diploma of readability and perception. Participating introduction and conclusion, each point out the general focus of the paper Factors : 40 Complete Assessment of the content material (a lot of the main factors mentioned). Ample abstract. Communicates the important thing concepts/themes/findings with appreciable readability, however lacks perception. Participating introduction and conclusion, paper focus inconsistently supported. Factors : 34 Minimal Assessment of the content material (a few of the main factors mentioned). Fundamental abstract. Communicates the important thing concepts/themes/findings with little readability or perception. Introduction and conclusion don’t point out the general focus of the paper. Factors : 28 No content material (missed all main factors of the content material). Incomplete abstract. Key concepts/themes/findings should not communicated clearly and/or missed in Assessment. There is no such thing as a clear introduction or conclusion Factors : 24
2 Reflection 30% Demonstrates thorough understanding of the article by itemizing all key findings and reflecting upon their implications. Factors : 30 Demonstrates appreciable understanding of the article by itemizing all the key findings. Factors : 25 Demonstrates some understanding of the article by itemizing a few of the key findings…however documentation is missing in completeness. Factors : 21 Demonstrates little understanding of the article with few or no key findings reported. Factors: 18
three Group & Growth of Concepts 15% Logical growth of concepts by means of welldeveloped paragraphs, good use of transitions. Factors : 15 Logical group, paragraph growth not perfected. Factors : 12 Logical group, paragraphs not absolutely developed. Factors : 10 No proof of construction or group. Factors: 08
four Mechanics 15% Meets size requirement. 1-2 grammatical errors. 1-2 punctuation errors. APA 7 Tips are meticulously adopted. Adheres to Font/Spacing Tips. Factors : 15 Size requirement is met with ample content material three-four grammatical errors. three-four punctuation errors. Adheres persistently to APA 7 tips, nonetheless, one error current. Adheres to both Font or Spacing Tips, however not each. Factors : 12 Size requirement is just not met; minimal content material 5-6 grammatical errors 5-6 punctuation errors Demonstrates little potential to stick to APA 7 tips, greater than two errors current Adheres to neither Font nor Spacing Tips Factors : 10 Size requirement is just not met; poor content material Quite a few grammatical errors (distracting) Quite a few punctuation errors APA 7 format is just not used Doesn’t adhere to Font/Spacing Tips. Factors : 08
TOTAL 100%
——
MSITM 6320 AGILE PROJECT MANAGEMENT – RESEARCH ARTICLE REVIEW RUBRIC Sheet1
SNO Standards
Weight Rating Glorious Good Honest Pretty Beneath Proficient
1 Assessment Content material
forty p.c
In-depth examination of the content material (all main factors mentioned). Glorious synopsis. Communicates key concepts/themes/findings with distinctive readability and perception. Each the introduction and conclusion are participating, and so they each point out the general focus of the paper. 40 factors An intensive examination of the content material (a lot of the main factors mentioned). A superb abstract. The important thing concepts/themes/findings are communicated with appreciable readability, however there’s a lack of perception. Whereas the introduction and conclusion are participating, the paper’s focus is inconsistently supported. 34 factors The content material has been subjected to solely a cursory examination (a few of the main factors mentioned). A quick abstract. With little readability or perception, communicates the important thing concepts/themes/findings. The introduction and conclusion don’t symbolize the general
