Skip to main content

iRubric: Disability Friendliness Research Project rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...
Disability Friendliness Research Project Environment and Society Assignment Evaluation of a research project on whether or not the school campus provides an atmosphere that accommodates those with disabilities. Rubric Code: MX495C By kssmith Ready to use Public Rubric Subject: Social Sciences Type: Assignment Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Paper component
	Excellent 3 pts	Good 2 pts	Fair 1 pts
Observational Section Met hourly requirements, plus teamwork
Observation Hours 5 % Reflects whether or not team as a whole met requirements and that all members contributed	Excellent Team meets total number of hours of required observation based on team size (5 hours per person)	Good Team total observation time is short 1 - 5 hours or 1 team member failed to complete 5 hours	Fair Team total observation time is more than 5 hours short or more than 1 team member failed to complete 5 hours.
Survey Section Mechanics, quality, teamwork
Survey Question Numbers 5 % Reflects whether or not team as a whole meets requirements and that all members contribute fairly	Excellent Group's surveys meet or exceed required number of survey questions (5 - 8); all team members collected 5 or more interviews/surveys each	Good Group's surveys include minimum number of questions on survey of 5 - 8; but one member of team did not collect required number of surveys	Fair Group's surveys did not include minimum number of questions; or 2 or more team members did not collect required number of surveys
Required demographics 5 % Includes required demographics in interviews	Excellent Group's surveys include all required basic demographics: age, race, religion, disability in family member, disability in self	Good Surveys are missing one demographic item	Fair Surveys are missing 2 or more demographic items
Thoroughness of research methods 5 % Collects required number of surveys, valid and reliable measures, meaningful data collation	Excellent Group collected all required data, created measures that covered the material well, and collated the data in a clear and meaningful manner; included tests of reliability and validity when gathering survey or observational data	Good Group collected all or almost all required data; created measures that covered the material well or reasonably well; and collated the data in a reasonably clear and meaningful manner, or with only 1 - 2 minor areas of error, or one major area of confusion; did consider validity and/or reliability issues when gathering survey or observational data	Fair Group did not collect all the required data; or there were three or more minor errors, or two or more major errors, in creating measures that cover the material fairly well, or collating the data in a reasonably understandable manner; group did not consider validity or reliability issues when gathering data.
Critical Thinking This corresponds to the quality element of your paper and presentation, but is related to clarity as well
Comprehension/Application Skills 12 % Shown throughout paper, but esp. in "Statement of Purpose" section. I am evaluating your ability to clearly identify and describe sociological concepts and theory, and to apply them in social research, moving from theory to data.	Excellent Correctly identifies and defines 3 or more sociological concepts or theories; correctly discusses how one or more of these concepts or theories could justify or explain the need for this research study.	Good Cites only 1 - 2 sociological concepts or theories throughout paper, but correctly discusses how one or both of these concepts or theories could justify or explain the need for this research study.	Fair Does not clearly identify any sociological concepts or theories; or misnames or misidentifies a concept or theory; or fails to incorporate any sociological concepts or theories into the statement of purpose section; or it appears from the points and/or evidence presented that team members have misunderstood or misapplied 1 or more concepts, theories, or other course materials.
Analysis and Synthesis Skills 13 % You will show this largely in your "Discussion of Methods" and "Findings and Conclusions" sections. For this element I am evaluating your capacity to utilize your sociological imagination in interpreting your findings and moving from data back to theory.	Excellent Correctly applies one or more concepts or theories to explain or justify the manner in which the team analyzed their data or interpreted their findings. Team included a critique of their methodology.	Good Applies one or more concepts or theories to explain or justify the manner in which the team analyzed their data or interpreted their findings, but with 1 - 2 minor errors. Team included a critique of their methodology, which may have included 1 -2 minor errors in logic or interpretation. Total errors no more than 3.	Fair Does not utilize sociological concepts in discussions of data analysis or interpretation of findings; or has 2 or more minor errors, or 1 major error, in application of concepts or theories. Team either failed to include a critique of their methodology, or it included 2 or more minor errors, or 1 major error, in logic or interpretation. Total errors (major + minor) no more than 3.
Synthesis/Evaluation Skills 15 % This component will appear largely in your "Findings and Conclusions" section. I will be looking for evidence of your capacity to summarize your research findings, integrate them with sociological concepts and theory, interpret their significance, and make judgments (again, ideally relating to or drawing upon sociological theory or concepts) regarding needed changes based on your conclusions.	Excellent Includes references to both data collected and sociological concepts/theories in drawing conclusions regarding meaning of findings; conclusions logically follow from the data; is able to make inferences based on data regarding whether or not additional changes/support of disabled are needed on campus.	Good Includes references to both data collected and sociological concepts/theories in drawing conclusions regarding meaning of findings, but conclusions are not necessarily consistent with or do not follow from the data; or there is little evidence of inferences based on data regarding whether or not additional changes/support of disabled are needed on campus.	Fair Team states opinion only and/or fails to cite evidence collected or sociological theory/concepts in drawing conclusions. Conclusions are unclear regarding the meaning of findings or do not flow clearly from the data. Few or no inferences made regarding need for additional support for disabled on campus.
Mechanics This includes clarity, proper citation, organization, completeness, and lack of grammar, spelling, syntax, and similar errors
Clarity and Cohesion of writing 10 %	Excellent Author's points are clearly outlined and presented, and flow in a logical order. Paper is well organized.	Good Author makes good points, but these are not presented in a clearly outlined or logically flowing manner. Topics jump without clear sequence.	Fair Points are difficult to find and/or follow. Little to no logical order evident.
Completeness of paper 15 %	Excellent Includes Statement of Purpose, Discussion of Methods, Discussion of Demographics, and Conclusions with Suggestions for Improvement if needed; each section is clearly identified and discusses the appropriate topics	Good Missing one of required five sections of Statement of Purpose, Discussion of Methods, Discussion of Demographics, and Conclusions with Suggestions for Improvement if needed; or 1 - 2 sections are not clearly identified and/or fail to discuss the appropriate topics	Fair Missing two or more of required five sections of Statement of Purpose, Discussion of Methods, Discussion of Demographics, and Conclusions with Suggestions for Improvement if needed; or 3 or more sections are not clearly identified and/or fail to discuss the appropriate topics
Grammar, Spelling, and Syntax 7 %	Excellent There are 2 or fewer errors in grammar, spelling, or syntax.	Good There are 3 - 6 errors in grammar, spelling, or syntax.	Fair There are 7 or more errors in grammar, spelling, or syntax.
Proper citation of sources 3 %	Excellent All sources are properly cited in the body of the text and the bibliography. Quotes are used correctly and style used is consistent.	Good 1 - 4 of the following errors: Sources are improperly cited in either the body of the text or the bibliography, or there are errors in one or both areas. Quotes may be omitted and/or style may be inappropriate or inconsistent.	Fair 5 or more of the following errors: Sources are improperly cited in either the body of the text or the bibliography, or there are errors in one or both areas. Quotes may be omitted and/or style may be inappropriate or inconsistent.
Submitted all required components 5 %	Excellent 1. hard copy of paper 2. online copy of paper 3. all copies of data collected 4. all time logs 5. DVD or CD copies of Powerpoint if used 6. copies of all tables, charts, and visual aids	Good Missing one element.	Fair Missing two or more elements.

Subjects:

Social Sciences

Types:

Discuss this rubric

You may also be interested in:

More rubrics by this author

More Social Sciences rubrics

More Presentation rubrics

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

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 iRubric^tm.

n202