Attributes |
Not Acceptable |
Emerging |
Developing |
Proficient |
Topical relationship of sources to paper |
Most sources are not adequately related to topic. |
Many sources are only marginally related to topic. |
Most sources are clearly related to topic. |
All sources are clearly related to topic. |
Quality and authority of sources selected |
Most sources are of poor, unreliable, or indeterminate quality and authority. |
Many sources are of marginal quality and authority. |
Most sources appear reliable and of good quality and authority. |
Sources appear reliable, authoritative and of good or high quality. |
Variety of information sources in terms of discipline, format, time, level, etc. |
Sources fail to represent a reasonable variety appropriate to topic. |
Sources represent some attempt at variety, but large gaps are obvious, major sources missed. |
Sources represent major, obvious angles and perspectives appropriate to topic. |
A wide variety of sources represent relevant and significant perspectives. |
Identification & description of authority of sources |
Annotations do not accurately describe author, audience or publisher of most sources. |
Annotations often lack such information or frequently mischaracterize author, audience or publisher of sources. |
Annotations usually accurately characterize author, audience and publisher of sources. |
Annotations largely, or fully, characterize author, audience and publisher of sources. |
Quality & clarity of the summary of ideas in sources |
Summaries appear to be possibly plagiarized or main ideas are unclear or misrepresented. |
Main ideas are not summarized clearly; or, summaries are simply incomplete or sketchy. |
Main ideas of sources are clearly summarized. |
Main ideas of sources, including nuances and subtleties, are clearly summarized. |
Representation & discussion of relevance of sources to paper or project |
No attempt is made to relate ideas in sources to paper topic. |
Attempt to relate ideas in sources to paper or project topic results in inaccurate representations. |
Attempt is to relate ideas in sources to paper topic or project sometimes fuzzy or unclear. |
Relationship of ideas in sources to paper topic or project clearly described. |
Quantity of sources cited |
Fails to include the required number of sources. |
Fails to include an adequate number of sources |
Includes the required or minimal number of sources. |
Includes the required or an appropriate number of sources. |
Accuracy of the citations |
Citations incomplete, errors are major and numerous. |
Citations are incomplete, errors numerous. |
Citations are mostly complete and errors minor. |
Citations are complete and errors minor. |
Research strategies & tools |
Description of research strategies employed and tools consulted obviously inaccurate; or, strategies & tools not described. |
Description of research strategies employed very poor; or, major, logical tools not consulted. |
Description of research strategies employed demonstrates awareness of research strategies; & an adequate variety of tools was consulted. |
Description of research strategies employed and tools consulted demonstrates superior skill and effort. |