SCHOOL OF BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE

SCHOOL OF BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Descriptors for Assessing each Level of Doctoral Project Quality The criteria below is specified for each level of doctoral project to evaluate the quality of the draft. Outstanding • Is original and significant, ambitious, brilliant, creative, elegant, engaging, insightful, and persuasive • Is well written and organized in a clear and concise manner • Connects components in a seamless way • Exhibits mature, independent thinking • Asks new questions or addresses an important question or problem • Clearly states the problem and why it is important • Displays a deep understanding of the literature • Exhibits command and authority over the material • Argument is focused, logical, and sustained • Shows a deep understanding of theory • Has a solid research design • Has rich data from multiple sources • Analysis is comprehensive, complete, and convincing • Is publishable in top-tier journals • Is of interest to a larger community and may inform the way people think • Pushes the discipline’s boundaries and opens new areas for research Very Good • Is solid, well written and organized • Has some original ideas, insights, and observations • Has a good question or problem • Shows understanding and mastery of the subject matter • Has a strong, comprehensive, and coherent argument • Includes well-executed research • Demonstrates technical competence • Uses appropriate (standard) theory, methods, protocols, and analysis • Presents solid results or answers • Makes a modest contribution to the field Acceptable • Meets standards, satisfactory, adequate, and appropriate • Shows the ability to do research • Displays some creativity, imagination, or insight • Writing is pedestrian and plodding • Demonstrates technical competence • Has a marginal structure and organization • Is narrow in scope • Displays basic understanding of the field • Reviews the literature adequately • Can sustain an argument or position • Demonstrates understanding of theory and application to the problem • Uses standard methods • Has an unsophisticated analysis—does not explore all possibilities and misses connections • Makes a small contribution Unacceptable • Is poorly written and lacks careful thought • Has spelling and grammatical errors that distract the reader • Has a poor presentation • Contains errors or mistakes • Misreads or misuses sources • Does not apply basic concepts, processes, or conventions of the discipline • Presents a question or problem that is weak, unoriginal, or already solved • Does not understand or misses relevant literature • Has a weak argument • Does not apply theory well, or theory is missing • Relies on inappropriate or incorrect methods • Has results that are flawed, or misinterpreted • Has inappropriate analysis • Includes results that are obvious, already known, unexplained, or misinterpreted • Has unsupported or exaggerated interpretation • Does not make a contribution

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doctoral Project Assessment Rubric

 

***Select View and edit document to enter information.            
Student: Click here to enter text.

Committee Chair: Click here to enter text.

Date: Click here to enter a date.          
  Rating Scale          
Second Member: Click here to enter text.

Third Member: Click here to enter text.

4 Outstanding 3 Very Good 2 Acceptable 1

Unacceptable

         
Holistic Assessments Learner Chair 2d Member 3d Member
The doctoral project follows a professional scholarly appearance Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Correct grammar used with proper punctuation, spelling, and APA formatting Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Written in a scholarly language that is clear, precise, and logically organized Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Abstract follows APA guidelines. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.

 

Comments:

Click here to enter text.

Chapter One – Overview Learner Chair 2d Member 3d Member
The introduction Includes a clear problem statement Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Presents issues or challenges related to the problem –Background of the Problem Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Describes the context in which the question arises – Statement of the Problem Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Describes the purpose of the study Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
The research question to be addressed is clearly presented Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Articulates benefits of the study or contribution-Significance Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Provides a roadmap for readers Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.

Comments:

Click here to enter text.

Chapter Two-Review of Selected Literature Learner Chair 2d Member 3d Member
The review Is comprehensive and current (5 years) Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Shows a command of the literature Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Highlights issues/concerns from the current literature Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Includes a discussion of the literature that is selective, thematic, and reflects synthesis Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.

Comments:

Click here to enter text.

Chapter Three- Methodology Learner Chair 2d Member 3d Member
The methods applied or developed are appropriate Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
An understanding of the methods’ advantages/disadvantages are clearly presented Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
In alignment with the question addressed and the theory Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Instruments (Protocols) detailed and presented Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Data Collection Procedures are detailed and clear Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Data Analysis is sound and clearly described Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.

Comments:

Click here to enter text.

Chapter Four – Results Learner Chair 2d Member 3d Member
Results logically interpreted Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Aligns with the research questions Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Reflects application of results with theoretical framework Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.

Comments:

Click here to enter text.

             
Chapter Five – Discussion Learner Chair 2d Member 3d Member
Asserts findings clearly from results and with detail Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Findings linked to literature Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Highlights alignment or misalignment with Theoretical Framework Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Modifications to Limitation or Delimitations highlighted Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Implications for Practice linked to findings and detailed Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Recommendation for Research to extend or improve study Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.
Conclusion is insightful and compelling and clearly articulates the significance of the research Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item. Choose an item.

Comments:

Click here to enter text.

 

1

 

5

"Is this question part of your assignment? We can help"

ORDER NOW