Skip to main content

iRubric: Annotated Bibliography rubric

find rubric

(draft) edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Annotated Bibliography 
IC C075 Annotated Bibliography
Rubric for an annotated bibliography consisting of 5 annotations of resources used to support a research paper. All citations must use MLA format.
Rubric Code: QX75W8A
By sheffields
Draft
Public Rubric
Subject: (General)  
Type: Writing  
Grade Levels: 6-8, Undergraduate

Powered by iRubric Annotated Bibliography Rubric
  Exceeds Expectations

10 pts

Meets Expectations

8.5 pts

Acceptable

7 pts

Needs Improvement

4 pts

Source Selection

Exceeds Expectations

Five (5) sources, all conforming to assignment guidelines; sources chosen are highly relevant to the topic; sources add greatly to research potential
Meets Expectations

Five (5) sources, at least three (3) conforming to assignment guidelines; some sources chosen are relevant to the topic; writer may need additional sources to complete research
Acceptable

Fewer than five (5) sources; sources are not relevant to researcher’s topic; the quality of sources will require a lot of additional research
Needs Improvement

Only one to two (1-2) sources used; sources are not relevant or connected to research topic.
Summary/Annotation

Exceeds Expectations

Annotations successfully and with lots of detail describe the source material, the author's main point and conclusions, and offer great insight into the source material; it is evident that article has been read
Meets Expectations

Annotations are an appropriate length and do a good job describing the source material, author's main point and conclusions, and offer good insight into the source material; it is clear that the articles were read
Acceptable

Some annotations may be too short or too long; annotations adequately describe the source material, but lack insight; some evidence that article has been read
Needs Improvement

Most annotations are either too short or too long; annotations do not describe the source material; annotations offer no insight; no evidence that article has been read
Evaluation

Exceeds Expectations

Evaluation clearly explains why the sources were chosen; described the format/type of the source; evaluated and gave evidence for author’s authority; evaluated source (sponsoring organizations, publishers, etc.); discussed other necessary evaluation criteria (audience, objectivity, currency, accuracy, reliability/relevance, and purpose/point of view)
Meets Expectations

Evaluation explains why the sources were chosen; described the format/type of the source; evaluated and gave evidence for author’s authority; evaluated source (sponsoring organizations, publishers, etc.); sometimes discussed other necessary evaluation criteria (audience, objectivity, currency, accuracy, reliability/relevance, and purpose/point of view)
Acceptable

Evaluation sometimes explains why the sources were chosen; gave inadequate description of the format/type of the source; evaluated and gave some evidence for author’s authority; evaluated source (sponsoring organizations, publishers, etc.); discussed some necessary evaluation criteria (audience, objectivity, currency, accuracy, reliability/relevance, and purpose/point of view)
Needs Improvement

Evaluation does not clearly explain why the sources were chosen; fails to adequately describe format/type of source; fails to evaluate and give evidence for author's authority; fails to adequately evaluate source (sponsoring organizations, publishers, etc.); fails to adequately discuss other necessary evaluation criteria (audience, objectivity, currency, accuracy, reliability/relevance, and purpose/point of view); sources are not very reliable with little justification for use
Credibility

Exceeds Expectations

All sources are from credible, scholarly materials
Meets Expectations

Most sources are from credible, scholarly materials
Acceptable

Some sources are from credible, scholarly materials
Needs Improvement

Sources lack credibility
MLA Formatting

Exceeds Expectations

No errors in MLA formatting rules (margins, spacing, font, headers, page numbering, etc)
Meets Expectations

A few errors in MLA formatting rules (margins, spacing, font, headers, page numbering, etc)
Acceptable

Many errors in MLA formatting rules (margins, spacing, font, headers, page numbering, etc)
Needs Improvement

Citations are not done in MLA format
Works Cited

Exceeds Expectations

Works cited has at least five (5) sources and is formatted to MLA specifications exactly
Meets Expectations

Works cited has at least three (3) sources and is formatted to MLA specification with the exception of two (2) errors
Acceptable

Works cited has less than three (3) sources and/or there are more than four (4) errors in MLA formatting
Needs Improvement

Works cited has only one (1) source that is not in MLA format
Grammar and Mechanics

Exceeds Expectations

Free from mechanical, grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors
Meets Expectations

A few mechanical, grammatical, punctuation, or spelling errors
Acceptable

Many mechanical, grammatical, punctuation, or spelling errors
Needs Improvement

Paragraphs are difficult to read and lacking basic sentence structure rules like, punctuation, capitalizing, spelling, etc...




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
This rubric is still in draft mode and cannot be scored. Please change the rubric status to ready to use.
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.

n178