Evaluation Criteria for Literature Review

Paper Elements

Exemplary

Proficient

Developing

Emerging

Introduction

30-27

Clearly written introduction that includes: (1) introduction of the issue, (2) background information on the issue, (3) argument on the importance of the issue and (4) clearly stated goals for the paper.

26-23

Clearly written introduction that completes 3 of the following tasks: (1) introduction of the issue, (2) background information on the issue, (3) argument on the importance of the issue and (4) clearly stated goals for the paper.

22-19

Clearly written introduction that completes 2 of the following tasks: (1) introduction of the issue, (2) background information on the issue, (3) argument on the importance of the issue and (4) clearly stated goals for the paper.

18-0

Not clearly written introduction that completes only 1 of the following tasks: (1) introduction of the issue, (2) background information on the issue, (3) argument on the importance of the issue and (4) clearly stated goals for the paper.

Research Purpose and Questions

30-27

Clearly states the research purpose related to the research issue. Clearly and concisely identifies 2 – 3 specific research questions, explains the relevance of the questions to the research issue. The importance and value of the project is evident.

26-23

Fairly clearly states the research purpose related to the research issue. Identifies 2 – 3 specific research questions, explains the relevance of the questions to the research issue. The importance and value of the project is evident.

22-19

Somewhat clearly states the research purpose related to the research issue. Identifies 2 – 3 specific research questions, but does not explain the relevance of the questions to the research issue. The importance and value of the project is somewhat clear.

18 – 0

Limited and/or confusing description of the research issue and/or purpose. Research questions are not succinct or are overlapping. Their relevance to the research issue is not explained. The importance and value of the project may not be clear.

Literature Review

90 – 81

Clearly and concisely defines all key terms and effectively integrates 15 or more scholarly sources to comprehensively answer the research questions. Examines appropriate theories, compares and contrasts research studies, summarizes findings.

80 – 71

Fairly clearly defines most key terms and fairly effectively integrates 15 mostly scholarly sources to answer research questions. Examines most appropriate theories, and compares and contrasts research studies.

70 – 61

Somewhat clearly defines key terms and somewhat effectively uses 12 – 15 sources to answer research questions; some sources may not be scholarly. Some examination of theories with some comparison of research studies.

60 – 0

Limited or confusing definition of key terms; may not integrate sources to answer research questions. Limited if any examination of theories; research studies are not comprehensively summarized as related to the questions.

Discussions

40-36

Thorough discussion of research findings. Insights, surprises and or contradictions are identified and reflected upon.

35-31

Somewhat thorough discussion of research findings. Insights, surprises and or contradictions are identified and reflected upon.

30-26

Minimal discussion of research findings. Insights, surprises and or contradictions are identified but not reflected upon.

25-0

Minimal discussion of research findings. Insights, surprises and or contradictions are not identified and reflected upon.

Critical Analysis

40-36

Consistently employs critical analysis to analyze research findings; searches for similarities and differences in research findings; analyzes limitations of research studies; supports all arguments and conclusions with research findings.

35-31

Often employs critical analysis to analyze research findings; searches for similarities and differences in research findings; analyzes limitations of research studies; supports most arguments and conclusions with research findings.

30-26

Rarely employs critical analysis to analyze research findings; does not identify similarities and differences in research findings; rarely analyzes limitations of research studies; supports some most arguments and conclusions with research findings.

25-0

Limited use of critical critical analysis to analyze research findings; does not identify similarities and differences in research findings; rarely analyzes limitations of research studies; does not support arguments and conclusions with research findings.

Conclusion

30-27

Objectively analyzes and synthesizes research to draw conclusions about the findings from the literature review. Emphasizes to what extent the research questions are answered. Suggest clearly next steps in addressing the issue.

26-23

Objectively analyzes and synthesizes research to draw conclusions about the findings from the literature review. Emphasizes to what extent the research questions are answered. Does not suggest next steps in addressing the issue.

22-19

Somewhat objectively analyzes and synthesizes research to draw conclusions about the findings from the literature review. Somewhat emphasizes to what extent the research questions are answered. Does not suggest clearly next steps in addressing the issue.

18 – 0

Limited analysis and synthesis of research to draw conclusions about the findings from the literature review. Does not emphasize to what extent the research questions are answered. Does not suggest clearly next steps in addressing the issue.

Sources

40 – 36

Uses 15 or more scholarly sources including 10 or more peer-reviewed journal articles and 4 or more research studies to examine the issue and answer research questions.

35 – 31

Uses 15, mostly scholarly sources, including 9 or more peer-reviewed journal articles and 3 or more research studies to examine the issue and answer research questions.

30 – 26

25 – 0

Uses less than 10 sources with several not being scholarly; includes 0 – 2 research studies to examine the issue and answer research questions.

Writing Mechanics

30-27

The paper is logical and well-written; spelling, grammar and punctuation are accurate. Paper is the required length of 10 – 12 pages of content, and includes all parts of the assignment.

26-23

The paper is fairly logical and well-written but with minor errors (1 – 3) in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. The paper may be 10% longer or shorter than the required length but includes all parts of the assignment.

22-19

The paper is somewhat logical but with some errors (4 – 10) in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. The literature review may be 20% too long or short, and may not include all parts of the assignment.

18 – 0

The paper lacks clarity and may be confusing with numerous (11+) errors in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. The literature review may be 30% too long or short, and does not include all parts of the assignment.

APA

20-18

All APA standards are followed in the paper, including correct title page, headings format, in-text citations and references, as well as clear and unbiased language.

17-15

APA standards are mostly followed in the paper, but there are few repeated mistakes (e.g. wrong in-text citations OR wrong heading format).

14-12

APA standards are mostly followed in the paper, but there are some different mistakes (e.g. wrong in-text citations AND wrong heading format).

11-0

Many APA standards are NOT followed in the paper in regard to title page, headings format, in-text citations and references, clear and unbiased language.