A research paper (gen. ed. assignment) on Coral Reef Ecology will be prepared. The body of the research paper must be a minimum of six double, spaced pages, using Calibri size 11 font, with an additional cover page, a table of contents, and a bibliography. Must use at least 5 sources and will be in MLA format. At the end of the paper discuss how the research on your topic changed or improved your understanding of ecological principles. The paper must meet the minimum requirements to be accepted for evaluation.
Rubric:
| Criteria | The Needy Paper (0-55) | The Need Help Paper (56-63) | The Good Paper (64-71) | The Superior Paper (72-80) |
| Thesis | Difficult to identify may be bland restatement of obvious point
(0-2) |
May be unclear (contain many vague terms), appear unoriginal, or offer relatively little that is new; provides little around which to structure the paper.
(3-5) |
Promising, but may be slightly unclear, or lacking in insight or originality.
(6-8) |
Easily identifiable, plausible, novel, sophisticated, insightful, crystal clear
(9-10) |
| Structure | Unclear, often because thesis is weak or non-existent. Transitions confusing and unclear. Few topic sentences.
(0-4) |
Generally unclear, often wanders or jumps around. Few or weak transitions, many paragraphs without topic sentences.
(5-7) |
Generally clear and appropriate, though may wander occasionally. May have a few unclear transitions, or a few paragraphs without strong topic sentences.
(8-11) |
Evident, understandable, appropriate for thesis. Excellent transitions from point to point. Paragraphs support solid topic sentences.
(12-15) |
| Use of Evidence | Very few or very weak examples. General failure to support statements, or evidence seems to support no statement. Quotes not integrated into sentences.
(0-4) |
Points often lack supporting evidence, or evidence used where inappropriate (often because there may be no clear point). Quotes may be poorly integrated into sentences.
(5-7) |
Examples used to support most points. Some evidence does not support point, or may appear where inappropriate. Quotations well integrated into sentences. Above average integration of secondary sources.
(8-11) |
Primary source information used to buttress every point with at least one example. Excellent integration of quoted material into sentences. Excellent integration of secondary sources.
(12-15) |
| Analysis | Very little or very weak attempt to relate evidence to argument; may be no identifiable argument, or no evidence to relate it to. Little or no use of secondary sources.
(0-4) |
Quotes appear often without analysis relating them to thesis (or there is a weak thesis to support), or analysis offers nothing beyond the quote. Poor to weak integration of secondary sources.
(5-7) |
Evidence often related to thesis, though links perhaps not very clear.
(8-11) |
Author clearly relates evidence to thesis; analysis is fresh and exiting, posting new ways to think of the material.
(12-15) |
| Logic and Argumentation | Ideas do not flow at all, usually because there is no argument to support. Simplistic view of topic; no effort to grasp possible alternative views.
(0-4) |
Logic may often fail, or argument may often be unclear. May not address counter-arguments. May contain logical contradictions.
(5-7) |
Argument of paper is clear, usually flows logically and makes sense. Some evidence that counter-arguments acknowledged, though perhaps not addressed.
(8-11) |
All ideas in the paper flow logically; the argument is identifiable, reasonable, and sound. Counterarguments are acknowledged and where possible refuted.
(12-15) |
| Mechanics | Big problems in sentence structure, grammar, and diction. Frequent major errors in citation style, punctuation, and spelling. May have many run-on sentences and comma splices.
(0-2) |
Problems in sentence structure, grammar, and diction (usually not major). Errors in punctuation, and spelling. May have several run-on sentences or fragments.
(3-5) |
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction strong despite occasional lapses; punctuation and citation style often used correctly. Some (minor) spelling errors; may have a couple of run-on sentences, sentence fragments, or other awkward constructions.
(6-8) |
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction excellent; correct use of punctuation and citation style; minimal to no spelling errors; absolutely no run-on sentences or awkward constructions.
(9-10) |
A research paper (gen. ed. assignment) on Coral Reef Ecology will be prepared. The body of the research paper must be a minimum of six double, spaced pages, using Calibri size 11 font, with an additional cover page, a table of contents, and a bibliography. Must use at least 5 sources and will be in MLA format. At the end of the paper discuss how the research on your topic changed or improved your understanding of ecological principles. The paper must meet the minimum requirements to be accepted for evaluation.
Rubric:
| Criteria | The Needy Paper (0-55) | The Need Help Paper (56-63) | The Good Paper (64-71) | The Superior Paper (72-80) |
| Thesis | Difficult to identify may be bland restatement of obvious point
(0-2) |
May be unclear (contain many vague terms), appear unoriginal, or offer relatively little that is new; provides little around which to structure the paper.
(3-5) |
Promising, but may be slightly unclear, or lacking in insight or originality.
(6-8) |
Easily identifiable, plausible, novel, sophisticated, insightful, crystal clear
(9-10) |
| Structure | Unclear, often because thesis is weak or non-existent. Transitions confusing and unclear. Few topic sentences.
(0-4) |
Generally unclear, often wanders or jumps around. Few or weak transitions, many paragraphs without topic sentences.
(5-7) |
Generally clear and appropriate, though may wander occasionally. May have a few unclear transitions, or a few paragraphs without strong topic sentences.
(8-11) |
Evident, understandable, appropriate for thesis. Excellent transitions from point to point. Paragraphs support solid topic sentences.
(12-15) |
| Use of Evidence | Very few or very weak examples. General failure to support statements, or evidence seems to support no statement. Quotes not integrated into sentences.
(0-4) |
Points often lack supporting evidence, or evidence used where inappropriate (often because there may be no clear point). Quotes may be poorly integrated into sentences.
(5-7) |
Examples used to support most points. Some evidence does not support point, or may appear where inappropriate. Quotations well integrated into sentences. Above average integration of secondary sources.
(8-11) |
Primary source information used to buttress every point with at least one example. Excellent integration of quoted material into sentences. Excellent integration of secondary sources.
(12-15) |
| Analysis | Very little or very weak attempt to relate evidence to argument; may be no identifiable argument, or no evidence to relate it to. Little or no use of secondary sources.
(0-4) |
Quotes appear often without analysis relating them to thesis (or there is a weak thesis to support), or analysis offers nothing beyond the quote. Poor to weak integration of secondary sources.
(5-7) |
Evidence often related to thesis, though links perhaps not very clear.
(8-11) |
Author clearly relates evidence to thesis; analysis is fresh and exiting, posting new ways to think of the material.
(12-15) |
| Logic and Argumentation | Ideas do not flow at all, usually because there is no argument to support. Simplistic view of topic; no effort to grasp possible alternative views.
(0-4) |
Logic may often fail, or argument may often be unclear. May not address counter-arguments. May contain logical contradictions.
(5-7) |
Argument of paper is clear, usually flows logically and makes sense. Some evidence that counter-arguments acknowledged, though perhaps not addressed.
(8-11) |
All ideas in the paper flow logically; the argument is identifiable, reasonable, and sound. Counterarguments are acknowledged and where possible refuted.
(12-15) |
| Mechanics | Big problems in sentence structure, grammar, and diction. Frequent major errors in citation style, punctuation, and spelling. May have many run-on sentences and comma splices.
(0-2) |
Problems in sentence structure, grammar, and diction (usually not major). Errors in punctuation, and spelling. May have several run-on sentences or fragments.
(3-5) |
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction strong despite occasional lapses; punctuation and citation style often used correctly. Some (minor) spelling errors; may have a couple of run-on sentences, sentence fragments, or other awkward constructions.
(6-8) |
Sentence structure, grammar, and diction excellent; correct use of punctuation and citation style; minimal to no spelling errors; absolutely no run-on sentences or awkward constructions.
(9-10) |
TO GET THIS OR ANY OTHER ASSIGNMENT DONE FOR YOU FROM SCRATCH, PLACE A NEW ORDER HERE
