| 1
Unsatisfactory
0.00% | 2
Less Than Satisfactory
65.00% | 3
Satisfactory
75.00% | 4
Good
85.00% | 5
Excellent
100.00% |
|---|
| 70.0 %Content | |
| 70.0 %Discussion of three informatics groups | Paper is missing all four content elements associated with “Excellent paper.” No relevant academic or industry sources are used. | Paper is missing any three of the four content elements associated with “Excellent paper.” Uses one or no relevant academic or industry sources. | Paper is missing any two of the four content elements associated with “Excellent paper.” Uses two or fewer relevant academic or industry sources. | Paper is missing any one of the four content elements associated with “Excellent paper.” Uses three or fewer relevant academic or industry sources. | Content Element 1: Provides the significant points in history for the selected area of informatics. Content Element 2: Discusses the lifecycle involved within the selected area of informatics resources or tools. Content Element 3: Defines the elements of organizational composition within the selected area of informatics. Content Element 4: Presents how theories have influenced the selected area of informatics. Uses four or more relevant academic or industry sources. |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | |
| 7.0 %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. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| 8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | 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. | Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | Surface 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. |
| 10.0 %Format | |
| 5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| 5.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) | No reference page is included. No citations are used. | Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. | Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present | Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. | In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. |
| 100 %Total Weightage | |
