Skip to main content
sign in
Username
Password
forgot?
Sign up
Share
help_outline
help
Pricing
Request Info
Please enable JavaScript on your web browser
menu
iRubric: Evironmental Biology Paper rubric
find rubric
Your browser does not support iframes.
edit
print
share
Copy to my rubrics
Bookmark
test run
assess...
delete
Do more...
Evironmental Biology Paper
Rubric Code:
Z56A5B
By
Jennifer918
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject:
Biology
Type:
Project
Grade Levels:
Undergraduate
Your browser does not support iframes.
Desktop Mode
Mobile Mode
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:
Biology
Types:
Project
Discuss this rubric
You may also be interested in:
More rubrics by this author
More Biology rubrics
More Project rubrics
Do more with this rubric:
Preview
Preview this rubric.
Edit
Modify this rubric.
Copy
Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.
Print
Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize
Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark
Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run
Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade
Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate
Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish
Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email
Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss
Discuss this rubric with other members.
Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.
Only with iRubric
tm
.
Copyright © 2024
Reazon Systems, Inc.
All rights reserved.
n232
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.