Skip to main content
iRubric: Literature Review rubric

iRubric: Literature Review rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Literature Review 
Literature Review
Paper will be graded on quality of research to support the historical, sociological, and cultural background of the argument issue, effective use of information gained through research, credibility of sources, content, grammar and mechanics, and the Works Cited page
Rubric Code: FX7X86B
By mmaurno
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: English  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Literature Review
  Excellent

4 pts

Good

3 pts

Fair

2 pts

Poor

1 pts

Quality of research

Excellent

--Cited 4 or more sources <BR>
--Sources, credible, reliable and properly cited.
--All information relevant to argument issue
--Sufficient information provided to support a comprehensive examination of the background
--Research in-depth and the beyond the obvious, revealing new insights gained to help develop the argument
Good

--Cited 3 sources and used correctly parenthetically and in the Works Cited page.
--Sources mostly reliable, and credible.Citation errors minor.
--Most information relevant to thesis and providing the needed background
--Sufficient information provided to develop a background on the argument issue
--Research of sufficient depth.
Fair

--Cited 2 sources in Works Cited and parenthetically
--Source reliability questionable. Omitted information does not interfere with ability of reader to find the source.
--Some information relevant to thesis/background
--Information provided to support some elements of argument issue
--Surface research.
Poor

--Failed to cite sources
--Source reliability questionable.
--Some information relevant to thesis/background
--Information provided to support some elements of topic
--Surface research or used Google exclusively
Content

Excellent

--Background interesting, of appropriate breadth for length of paper
--Support for thesis complex, complete, & in-depth.
--Writer involved with providing a thorough and accurate background of the argument issue
--Clear and appropriate organization, with effective transitions, introduction, and conclusion.
Good

--Background somewhat broad or narrow for length of paper and not a complete overview.
--Writer involved with providing a generally thorough and accurate background of the argument issue
--Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion slightly lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.
Fair

--Background too broad or narrow for length of paper and information is not adequately supported.
--Writer barely involved with providing background of the argument issue
--Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.
Poor

--Little to no background is given on the argument issue
--Writer not involved with providing an accurate background of the argument issue
--Organization, transitions, introduction, and conclusion lacking clarity and/or appropriateness.
Works Cited

Excellent

--All sources properly cited in both paper and Works Cited page
-- Few to no errors in format or punctuation.
Good

--Most sources properly cited in both paper and Works Cited page
--Some minor errors in format or punctuation.
Fair

--Not all sources properly cited in both paper and Works Cited page
-- Several minor errors in format or punctuation.
Poor

Few or no sources properly cited in both paper and Works Cited page
-- Numberous errors in format or punctuation
Grammar and Mechanics

Excellent

--Consistent and appropriate voice.
-- Sophisticated and precise word choice.
--Very few if any spelling errors.
--Very few if any errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- Very few punctuation or capitalization errors.
--Met all style and min/max page requirements
Good

-- Voice mostly consistent and appropriate
-- Fairly effective word choice.<BR>
--some minor spelling errors.
--some minor errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- Minor punctuation or capitalization errors.
--Met most style and min/max page requirements
Fair

-- Voice somewhat consistent and appropriate.
-- Correct word choice but not very sophisticated
--Sever minor spelling errors.
--Several minor errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- Several minor punctuation or capitalization errors.
Failed to meet style and/or min/max page requirements
Poor

-- Voice either inconsistent and/or inappropriate.
-- Many errors in word choice.
--Many spelling errors.
--Many errors in agreement, pronouns/antecedents, or tense.
-- Several punctuation or capitalization errors.
Failed to meet style and/or min/max page requirements
Plagiarism

Excellent

Student's work is original
- sources cited
-reliable sources
-does not heavily rely on Wikipedia, or other unreliable sources
Good

Student's work is somewhat original
- relies too heavily on paraphrasing although sources cited
-sources are not all reliable
Fair

Students work is largely unoriginal and relies on questionable sources.
Poor

Student's work is heavily plagiarized



Keywords:
  • Literature Review - Emphasis on relevance of sources and their relation to the topic


Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.


Copyright © 2024 Reazon Systems, Inc.  All rights reserved.
n232