Criterion

 

A

10 – 8.5

 

B

8.4 – 7.5

 

C

7.4 – 6.5

 

D

6.4 - 6

F

< 6.0

Abstract

5%

Abstract is proper length.

Highly informative, complete and easy to understand.

Effective use of technical terminology is incorporated.

Abstract makes you want to read the paper.

Abstract is proper length.

Informative, complete and understandable.

Appropriate technical terminology is incorporated

 

Abstract is proper length.

Somewhat informative and understandable but lacks accuracy or specifics.

Abstract is not the proper length.

Not very informative or understandable.

Very poor. Abstract not comprehensible OR Abstract missing

Title,  Introduction and Literature Review

5%

Title and research objectives are precise and superbly written thus offer specific details about the issue, purpose and context of the proposed study.

Title and research objectives are informative and offer sufficiently specific details about the issue, purpose and context of the proposed study.

Title and research objectives are relevant, offering some details about the proposed research study.

Title and research objectives lack relevance or fail to offer appropriate details about the issue, purpose and context of the proposed study.

Title and research objectives are inappropriate given the purpose and method of the proposed study.

Methodology

5 %

Excellent. Demonstrates advanced understanding, depth and insight of the relevant research design, techniques and analysis.

Demonstrates very good understanding, depth and insight of the relevant research design, techniques and analysis.

The research design, techniques and analysis have been identified and described in sufficiently detailed terms. Adequate knowledge and understanding of research methodology.

The proposed research methodology is incomplete given the research objective. Not that clearly written and disorganised.

The proposed research methodology is inappropriate or has not been identified. Unsatisfactory explanation. Fails to show understanding of research methodology topic.

Results/ Facts

Data presentation and graphical Layout (15)

The style and quality of tables, illustrations and/or graphical representations are of a high quality and contribute to the formulation of innovative research findings.

The style and quality of tables, illustrations and/or graphical representations are of a good quality.

The style and quality of tables, illustrations and/or graphical representations are of a satisfactory quality and contribute to the formulation of original arch findings.

The style and quality of tables, illustrations and/or graphical representations are of a poor quality and do not contribute to the formulation of research findings.

The style and quality of tables, illustrations and/or graphical representations are of a disappointing quality and contribute to the unsatisfactory formulation of research findings.

 

Discussion of Results (20 %)

There is striking evidence of deep, personal insights into the field. The research findings make a significant contribution to the knowledge base of the discipline and field of study. The logical progression from research objectives to conclusions is very convincing. The chapters as a whole form an interwoven, coherent unit.

The research findings make a good contribution to the knowledge base of the discipline and field of study. There is a logical coherence between the objectives and the findings. The report is closely argued and well structured.

 

There is limited evidence of personal insights into the field. The research findings make a minor contribution to the  knowledge base of the discipline and field of study.

The greater part of the work is sufficiently covered, and the text is well organised and clearly argued.

A satisfactory understanding of the significance of the research and a reasonably competent interpretation. There is evidence of organisation and structure, but the inadequate coherence reflects a lack of insight and understanding.

 

The report does not succeed in demonstrating familiarity with basic academic conventions of presentation and organisation.

There are almost no logical coherence and progression from the objectives to the findings.

Conclusion and Recommendations (15 %)

Findings lead to well- designed logical conclusions and recommendations. Strong evidence is given to support the conclusions and recommendations.

The conclusions and recommendations are logical and valid. The conclusions are communicated clearly.

The conclusions and recommendations are partially logical and/or valid. They are communicated clearly.

Little evidence to support

Conclusions/recommendations. The conclusions are not in all respects logical and valid.

No logical/valid conclusions or recommendations are reached.

References

 

 

10%

The student is very well versed and practiced in the APA system, the referencing cannot be faulted. The reference list contains recent sources and reflects an extensive breadth and depth of research.

 

All of the ideas from other writers have been acknowledged.  Demonstrates a good understanding of the APA system. A wide range of recent and credible sources are included in the reference list.

All of the ideas from other writers have been acknowledged however there are a number of inconsistencies. Shows a basic understanding of the APA system. The reference list only includes a limited amount of recent and credible sources.

Most of the ideas from other writers have been acknowledged.  Limited understanding of the APA system. The reference list only includes a small amount of sources. More recent and/or credible sources are required.

Some of the ideas from other writers have not been acknowledged. References are of poor quality with not enough sources listed. Fails to show an understanding of the APA system.

Report Presentation Grammar

 

 

15%

Excellent. The student has submitted a professional document. The writing style is of a very high quality with no or extremely few linguistic and typographical errors.

 

The student has followed all of the guidelines. Well presented work. The writing style is of good quality. There are few linguistic and typographical errors.

The student has followed most of the guidelines. The writing style is of acceptable quality. There are some linguistic and typographical errors.

 

The student has followed some of the presentation guidelines. The writing style requires attention. There are omissions and linguistic and/or typographical errors.

 

The student has not followed the presentation guidelines. There are serious and unacceptable linguistic and typographical errors. Poor grammar and spelling.

 

Survey and appendices

 

10 %

Very reliable and valid set of questionnaire/set of survey instruments are presented

Properly presented the survey instruments

Survey instruments are given but with errors

Survey instruments inadequate/incomplete

Irrelevant survey instruments / survey instruments not provided