All information in the attachments. Please read thoroughly.
1/15/24, 12:16 PM
Page 1 of 2about:srcdoc
Synthesis Paper – Researcher Skills – Rubric Total 220 points
Criterion
1. 1:
Unsatisfactory
2. 2: Less Than
Satisfactory
3. 3: Satisfactory 4. 4: Good 5. 5: Excellent
Introduction
Introduction
0 points
An introduction is either
missing or not evident to
the reader.
24.09 points
An introduction is
present, but incomplete
or illogical.
27.06 points
An introduction is
presented, but does not
contextualize the topic
well.
30.03 points
An introduction is
present and adequately
contextualizes the topic.
33 points
An introduction is
thoroughly presented
and vividly
contextualizes the topic.
Support of Common
Themes
Support of Common
Themes
0 points
Support of common
themes is either missing
or not evident to the
reader.
32.12 points
Support of common
themes is present, but
inaccurate or illogical.
36.08 points
Support of common
themes is presented, but
is cursory and lacking in
depth.
40.04 points
Support of common
themes is present and
thorough.
44 points
Support of common
themes is thoroughly
presented with rich
detail.
Discussion of
Conclusions
Discussion of
Conclusions
0 points
A discussion of the
conclusions is not
presented.
24.09 points
A discussion of the
conclusions is
presented, but
inaccurate or illogical.
27.06 points
A discussion of the
conclusions is
presented, but it does
not include an overall
summary of themes
found in the articles or
does not connect well to
the thesis statement.
30.03 points
A discussion of the
conclusions is presented
and includes an overall
summary of themes
found in the articles and
reasonably connects to
the thesis statement.
33 points
A discussion of the
conclusions is
thoroughly presented
including an overall
summary of themes
found in the articles and
is strongly connected to
the thesis statement.
Synthesis and
Argument
Synthesis and Argument
0 points
No synthesis of source
information is evident.
Statement of purpose is
not followed to a
justifiable conclusion.
The conclusion does not
support the claim made.
Argument is incoherent
and uses non-credible
sources.
48.18 points
Synthesis of source
information is
attempted, but is not
successful. Sufficient
justification of claims is
lacking. Argument lacks
consistent unity. There
are obvious flaws in the
logic. Some sources have
questionable credibility.
54.12 points
Synthesis of source
information is present,
but pedantic. Argument
is orderly, but may have
a few inconsistencies.
The argument presents
minimal justification of
claims. Argument
logically, but not
thoroughly, supports the
purpose. Sources used
are credible.
Introduction and
conclusion bracket the
thesis.
60.06 points
Synthesis of source
information is present
and meaningful.
Argument shows logical
progressions.
Techniques of
argumentation are
evident. There is a
smooth progression of
claims from introduction
to conclusion. Most
sources are
authoritative.
66 points
Synthesis of source
information is present
and scholarly. Argument
is clear and convincing,
presenting a persuasive
claim in a distinctive and
compelling manner. All
sources are
authoritative.
Thesis Development
and Purpose
Thesis Development and
Purpose
0 points
Paper lacks any
discernible overall
purpose or organizing
claim.
16.06 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are insufficiently
developed and/or vague;
purpose is not clear.
18.04 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are apparent and
appropriate to purpose.
20.02 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and forecast
the development of the
paper. They are
descriptive and reflective
of the arguments and
appropriate to the
purpose.
22 points
Thesis and/or main claim
are clear and
comprehensive; the
essence of the paper is
contained within the
thesis.
1/15/24, 12:16 PM
Page 2 of 2about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing
Mechanics of Writing
0 points
Mechanical errors are
pervasive enough that
they impede
communication of
meaning. Inappropriate
word choice and/or
sentence construction
are used.
8.03 points
Frequent and repetitive
mechanical errors
distract the reader.
Inconsistencies in
language choice
(register), sentence
structure, and/or word
choice are present.
9.02 points
Some mechanical errors
or typos are present, but
are not overly distracting
to the reader. Correct
sentence structure and
audience-appropriate
language are used.
10.01 points
Prose is largely free of
mechanical errors,
although a few may be
present. A variety of
sentence structures and
effective figures of
speech are used.
11 points
Writer is clearly in
command of standard,
written, academic
English.
APA Format
APA Format
0 points
Required format is rarely
followed correctly. No
reference page is
included. No in-text
citations are used.
8.03 points
Required format
elements are missing or
incorrect. A lack of
control with formatting
is apparent. Reference
page is present.
However, in-text
citations are
inconsistently used.
9.02 points
Required format is
generally correct.
However, errors are
present (e.g. font, cover
page, margins, and in-
text citations). Reference
page is included and lists
sources used in the
paper. Sources are
appropriately
documented though
some errors are present.
10.01 points
Required format is used,
but minor errors are
present (e.g. headings
and direct quotes).
Reference page is
present and includes all
cited sources.
Documentation is
appropriate and citation
style is usually correct.
11 points
The document is
correctly formatted. In-
text citations and a
reference page are
complete and correct.
The documentation of
cited sources is free of
error.
© 2024. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
