Title: ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________

Qualities & Criteria "ntroduction #$eoretical & Conceptual %rame&or' (et$odolo)y Exemplary (10)
The research problem isvery apparent to the reader and hassufficient conceptual backstop. The ideas are arranged logically to support the purpose. They flow smoothly from one to another and are clearly linked to each other. Line of reasoning is clear all thru out !esearch design is clearly explained" sampling of participants are ade uately described" source#s of research instruments recognized, scoring, validation $ reliability testing was conducted. %alanced presentation of relevant and legitimate information that shows a thoughtful, in&depth analysis and interpretation of data. !eader gains important insights. The paper makes succinct and precise conclusions based on the findings $ literature review. (onclusion indicates reflection on personal position and current understandings. The paper presents legitimately clear recommendations based on the ma)or findings $ conclusions (ompelling research from professionally legitimate sources is given. 'ttribution is clear and fairly represented. The group presentation is persuasive. +ach member has a significant task to the presentation of the paper ,verall presentationcatches $ sustains the audiencesinterest throughout.

MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology Research Paper Rubrics

Good (8)
The research problem issomewhat apparent to the reader with literature support. The ideas are arranged logically to support the purpose. They are usually clearly linked to each other. Line of reasoning is clear in most part. !esearch design is somewhat explained" sampling of participants are described" source#s of research instruments recognized, scoring, validation $ reliability testing was conducted. Information displays evidence of a basic analysis and interpretation of data. !eader gains some insights. The paper makes some precise conclusions based on the findings $ literature review. (onclusion indicates some reflection on personal position and current understandings. The paper presents legitimate recommendations based on the some ma)or findings $ conclusions *rofessionally legitimate sources are generally present and attribution is, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. The presentation is generally engaging. +ach member presented but has some dry spots. In general, it is focused but does not sustain the audiences- attention.

Acceptable (6)
The research problem is somewhat apparent but does not reveal any connection with existing literature. In general, the ideas are not arranged logically, although occasionally ideas fail to make sense together. Line of reasoning is fairly clear. !esearch design is somewhat explained" sampling of participants are not described fully" source#s of research instruments recognized, scoring, no evidence of validation $reliability testing. Information displays evidence of a basic analysis and interpretation of data at times. !eader gains few insights. The paper provides a conclusion vaguely supported by findings $research review. The conclusion does not connect the personal position with current understandings. The paper presents somewhat legitimate recommendations barely based on the ma)or findings $ conclusions 'lthough attributions are occasionally given, many statements seem unsubstantiated. The reader is confused about source of information and ideas. The presentation is dull and un&engaging. Though the presentation has some interesting parts, the audiences find it difficult to maintain interest at times.

Unacceptable ( )
The research problem is not clear to the reader. The ideas are not logically organized. Fre uently, ideas fail to make sense together. Line of reasoning not clear. !esearch design is not clear" sampling of participants not described" source#s of research instruments not recognized, scoring, validation $ reliability testing not explained 'nalysis is vague or not evident. !eader is confused or may be misinformed. There is little to no evidence of synthesis of the information. The paper presents recommendations that are not based on the ma)or findings $ conclusions !eferences are seldom cited to support statements. The presentation is dull and un& engaging. The audiences find it difficult to maintain interest..

!core

*ata Analysis and "nterpretation Conclusion

+ecommendations

Use o, +e,erences -.erall /resentation

#otal

Evaluated by: _____________________________________

Name & Signature