Formal Research Proposal (FRP) Scoring Rubric

/0 Comments/in /by

Formal Research Proposal (FRP) Scoring Rubric
 
The successful completion of an FRP encompasses several important areas.  These include formatting, the correct utilization of APA style, writing style, and content.  The FRP represents the capstone project for this course and will be weighted accordingly.  The FRP consists of Front Matter, Chapter 1: Problem Area, Chapter 2: Literature Review, and Chapter 3 Research Design.
Each section will be evaluated and graded as a free-standing unit.
 
Note:  The FRP will be evaluated and scored according to the Scoring Rubric found at the end of this syllabus.  The total point value of the FRP will be 100 points.  Each section of the FRP will be evaluated and graded according to the FRP Grading Rubric.  The following information outlines the required components.  Each element will be fully explained during the course.
 

  1. Front Matter (25 points possible)
  2. Format & APA Style
  3. APA Style
  4. Components
  5. Title Page (1 page)
  6. Certification Page (1 page)
  7. Table of Contents (1 page)

 

  1. Chapter One: Problem Area (Total 4-6 pages) (25 points possible)

 

  1. Purpose of the Study
  2. Problem Statement
  3. Research Questions
  4. Definition of Terms
  5. Chapter Summary

 
 
 

  1. Chapter Two: Literature Review (Total 4-5 pages) (25 points possible)

 

  1. Historical Background and Context
  2. Specific Focus of the Topic
  3. Sources from the topic’s broader academic discipline
  4. Sources from the topic’s trade literature
  5. Bibliography

 

  1. Chapter Three: Research Design (Total 3-5 pages) (25 points possible)

 

  1. Restatement/Summary of Problem and Purpose
  2. General Methodology proposed
  3. Specific proposed procedures
  4. Sample population or data sample
  5. Data Collection/Retrieval
  6. Treatment of the Data

 
 
FRP Grading Rubric

Category 0-4 points 5-8 points 9-12 points 13-16 points 17-25 points
1. Technical requirements (grammar, punctuation, spelling, typed, double-spaced, min. Length; font size no larger than 12 Grammar, punctuation, spelling errors are frequent and distracting; not typed; or d-spaced or not min length Grammar, punctuation, & spelling errors are frequent and distracting (>3 but <10); typed, d-spaced, and at least 3 pages long. Major grammar, punctuation, & spelling errors (>3 but <10); typed, d- spaced, and min length. Minor (<3) grammar, punctuation, & spelling errors; typed, d-spaced, and at least 3-5 pages long. Essay is technically flawless; typed, d-spaced, and at least 3-5 pages long.
2. Documentation: valid sources; quotes, paraphrases, and summaries are appropriately documented; adequate original ideas. Works are cited; plagiarism is avoided.* Sources are not appropriate; inadequate documentation; incorrect citation format .  Does not tie FRP to a broad academic discipline. No signal phrases. Sources not appropriate; research is somewhat documented but not well integrated; paper overly dependent on outside sources. No signal phrases. Sources appropriate.  phrases. Research is documented but not well integrated; too dependent on outside sources. No signal phrases. Sources appropriate; phrases; research is fairly well integrated and fairly well documented. Works not cited properly. Some signal phrases. Sources are appropriate; signal phrases are used to introduce research which is properly documented; works cited. FRP is tied to a broad academic discipline.
3. Thesis is debatablepoint. Opposing viewpoint considered; specific supporting evidence. Sensitivity to audience. Thesis is not clear or is a fact; opposing views ignored. Lacks specific evidence; writer not sensitive to audience. Thesis is clear but weak; evidence is weak or very general. Opposition ignored. No sensitivity to audience. Thesis is debatable point; inadequate evidence. Opposition considered; some sensitivity to audience. Thesis is debatable point; supporting evidence is moderate. Some sensitivity to audience. Thesis is a debatable point; opposing points recognized; specific supporting evidence; sensitive to audience.
4. Demonstrates understanding of theories or methods or concepts discussed in class. Does not demonstrate understanding of topics discussed in class. Demonstrates lack of understanding of 3 or more topics. Demonstrates fair understanding of 1-2 topics. Demonstrates good understanding of 3-4 topics. Demonstrates good understanding of 4-5 topics.
5. Critical thinking and analysis Shows no effort and/or analysis. Shows minimal effort and analysis. Shows adequate effort and analysis. Shows excellent effort and analysis. Shows exceptional effort and analysis.

 

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *