Skip to main content
iRubric: Evironmental Biology Paper rubric

iRubric: Evironmental Biology Paper rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Evironmental Biology Paper 
Evironmental Biology Paper
Rubric Code: M58639
By joaldcalpo
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Biology  
Type: Project  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Enter rubric title
  Very Good

5 pts

Good

4 pts

Fair

3 pts

Poor

2 pts

Lacking or Missing

1 pts

Conceptual

Very Good

Has cogent analysis, shows command of interpretive and conceptual tasks required by assignment and course materials: ideas original, often insightful, going beyond ideas discussed in lecture and class
Good

Shows a good understanding of the texts, ideas and methods of the assignment; goes beyond the obvious; may have one minor factual or conceptual inconsistency
Fair

Shows an understanding of the basic ideas and information involved in the assignment; may have some factual, interpretive, or conceptual errors
Poor

shows inadequate command of course materials or has significant factual and conceptual errors; does not respond directly to the demands of the assignment; confuses some significant ideas
Lacking or Missing

Writer has not understood lectures, readings, discussion, or assignment
Thesis

Very Good

Essay controlled by clear, precise, well-defined thesis: is sophisticated in both statement and insight
Good

Clear, specific, argumentative thesis central to the essay; may have left minor terms undefined
Fair

General thesis or controlling idea; may not define several central terms
Poor

Thesis vague or not central to argument; central terms not defined
Lacking or Missing

No discernible thesis
Development & Support

Very Good

Well-chosen examples; persuasive reasoning used to develop and support thesis consistently: uses quotations and citations effectively; causal connections between ideas are evident
Good

Pursues thesis consistently: develops a main argument with clear major points and appropriate textual evidence and supporting detail; makes an effort to organize paragraphs topically
Fair

Only partially develops the argument; shallow analysis; some ideas and generalizations undeveloped or unsupported; makes limited use of textual evidence; fails to integrate quotations appropriately
Poor

Frequently only narrates; digresses from one topic to another without developing ideas or terms; makes insufficient or awkward use of textual evidence
Lacking or Missing

Little or no development; may list facts or misinformation; uses no quotations or fails to cite sources or plagiarizes
Stucture

Very Good

Appropriate, clear and smooth transitions; arrangement of paragraphs seems particularly apt
Good

Distinct units of thought in paragraphs controlled by specific and detailed topic sentences; clear transitions between developed, cohering, and logically arranged paragraphs that are internally cohesive
Fair

Some awkward transitions; some brief, weakly unified or undeveloped paragraphs; arrangement may not appear entirely natural; contains extraneous information
Poor

Simplistic, tends to narrate or merely summarize; wanders from one topic to another; illogical arrangement of ideas
Lacking or Missing

No transitions; incoherent paragraphs; suggests poor planning or no serious revision
Mechanics

Very Good

Almost entirely free of spelling,
punctuation, and grammatical errors.
Good

May contain a few errors, which may
annoy the reader but not impede
understanding.
Fair

Usually contains several mechanical
errors, which may temporarily
confuse the reader but not impede
the overall understanding.
Poor

Usually contains either many
mechanical errors or a few important
errors that block the reader's
understanding and ability to see
connections between thoughts.
Lacking or Missing

Usually contains so many
mechanical errors that it is
impossible for the reader to follow
the thinking from sentence to
sentence.
Example of a Grading Rubric For a Term Paper in Any Discipline
Language

Very Good

uses sophisticated sentences effectively; usually chooses words aptly; observes conventions of written English and manuscript format; makes few minor or technical errors
Good

Some mechanical difficulties or stylistic problems; may make occasional problematic word choices or awkward syntax errors; a few spelling or punctuation errors or cliché; usually presents quotations effectively
Fair

More frequent wordiness; several unclear or awkward sentences; imprecise use of words or over-reliance on passive voice; one or two major grammatical errors (subject-verb agreement, comma splice, etc.); effort to present quotations accurately
Poor

Some major grammatical or proofreading errors (subject-verb agreement; sentence fragments); language marred by clichés, colloquialisms, repeated inexact word choices; inappropriate quotations or citations format
Lacking or Missing

Numerous grammatical errors and stylistic problems seriously distract from the argument
Sources

Very Good

Information is gathered from a minimum of 3-each electronic and non-electronic sources
Good

Information is gathered from multiple electronic and non-electronic sources.
Fair

Information is gathered from a few electronic and non-electronic sources.
Poor

Some information has been collected.
Lacking or Missing

What sources have been used is not clear.
Amount of Information

Very Good

Compelling evidence from
professionally legitimate
sources is given to support
claims. Attribution is clear and
fairly represented.
Good

Professionally legitimate sources
that support claims are generally
present and attribution is, for the
most part, clear and fairly
represented.
Fair

Although attributions are
occasionally given, many
statements seem unsubstantiated.
The reader is confused about the
source of information and ideas
Poor

References are seldom cited to support statements.
Lacking or Missing
Quality of Information

Very Good

References are primarily peerreviewed
professional journals
or other approved sources (e.g.,
government documents, agency
manuals, …). The reader is
confident that the information
and ideas can be trusted.
Good

Although most of the references
are professionally legitimate, a few
are questionable (e.g., trade books,
internet sources, popular
magazines, …). The
reader is uncertain of the
reliability of some of the sources.
Fair

Most of the references are from
sources that are not peerreviewed
and have uncertain
reliability. The reader doubts
the accuracy of much of the
material presented.
Poor

There are virtually no sources
that are professionally reliable.
The reader seriously doubts
the value of the material and
stops reading.
Lacking or Missing

Information has little or nothing to do with the main topic.
Citations & Bibliography

Very Good

All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented in APA format.
Good

All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but a few are not in APA format.
Fair

All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but many are not in APA format.
Poor

Sources are not accurately documented in APA format.
Lacking or Missing

Sources are not accurately documented in APA format in either the body of the paper or the bibliography.




Subjects:

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.
n60