100% found this document useful (1 vote)
166 views3 pages

Capstone Research Project Research Proposal Rubric: Most Two Perspectives That Are

This document outlines a rubric for evaluating capstone research project proposals. It assesses proposals on criteria such as the introduction, background, statement of the problem, scope and limitations, and methodology. For each criterion, it provides descriptors for work that is excellent, very good, satisfactory, and needs improvement. For example, for the introduction section to meet the excellent criteria it must identify the research gap, proposed solution, and related work through citations in a concise form, while for methodology the excellent criteria requires an appropriate research design be established with a well-defined relationship between the research questions and methods.

Uploaded by

Aliah Lingbawan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
100% found this document useful (1 vote)
166 views3 pages

Capstone Research Project Research Proposal Rubric: Most Two Perspectives That Are

This document outlines a rubric for evaluating capstone research project proposals. It assesses proposals on criteria such as the introduction, background, statement of the problem, scope and limitations, and methodology. For each criterion, it provides descriptors for work that is excellent, very good, satisfactory, and needs improvement. For example, for the introduction section to meet the excellent criteria it must identify the research gap, proposed solution, and related work through citations in a concise form, while for methodology the excellent criteria requires an appropriate research design be established with a well-defined relationship between the research questions and methods.

Uploaded by

Aliah Lingbawan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

CAPSTONE RESEARCH PROJECT

RESEARCH PROPOSAL RUBRIC

Criteria Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Needs Improvement


Introduction
25 24-20 19-12 13-0
 The overview of study was discussed in a  The overview discussed on the research  The overview of the study was  The component was not
short and relevant form that identifies and gap, its proposed solution and related presented in a lengthy form with presented in the paper.
presents the research gap, its proposed research works. details which has low relevance to the Or
solution and related research works through  Main topics are not fully supported by in-text study.  No unifying idea among the
in-text citations. citation and not presented in a brief form.  Supporting statements or related statements presented was
 Supporting statements or related studies  Supporting statements or related studies studies from valid and credible observed.
from valid and credible sources (not more from valid and credible sources (not more sources (not more than 10 years)  Some supporting statements to
than 10 years) provides relevant content from than 10 years) provides relevant content provides relevant content from at the conceptual framework of the
at least five perspectives that are sequenced from at most four perspectives that are most two perspectives that are study are from valid and
logically and have smooth transition between sequenced logically and have smooth sequenced logically and have smooth credible sources (not more than
Background topics. transition between topics. transition between topics. 10 years) and provides relevant
of the Study (e.g. textbook, market, R&D, academe, (e.g. textbook, market, R&D, academe, (e.g. textbook, market, R&D, content from at most 1
-Narrative industry, etc.) industry, etc.) academe, industry, etc.) perspective which are
Hook  At least 15 in-text citations are presented as  Around10-14 In-text citations are presented  Around 5-9 in-text citations are sequenced logically and have
supporting statements in accordance with as supporting statements in accordance presented as supporting statements in smooth transition between
-Main Problem
satisfactory scientific writing style format and with satisfactory scientific writing style accordance with satisfactory scientific topics.
-Related
mechanics. format and mechanics. writing style format and mechanics. (e.g. textbook, market, R&D,
Studies and  At least three targeted beneficiaries were  Beneficiaries were identified and
 At least two relevant beneficiaries were academe, industry, etc.)
their discussed along with their specific and discussed along with their specific and discussed with benefits which are of  Around 1-4 in-text citations are
Deficiencies immediate benefits. immediate benefits. low relevance to the methodology and presented as supporting
-Significance of (e.g. Client/Users, R&D, Market) results. statements in accordance with
the Study satisfactory scientific writing
-Purpose of the style format and mechanics.
Study  Beneficiaries were only
identified, without any relevant
benefits discussed.
15 14-11 10-8 7-0
 The general statement of the study was  The general statement of the study was  The general statement of the study  The component was not
stated to present the title of the project as the stated to present the title of the project as was stated to present the title of the presented in the paper.
main goal. the main goal. project as their main goal but with  Or
 At least two specific, measurable, and well-  Some research questions require minor minor corrections.  Major changes are required to
Statement of
defined research questions are presented. modifications to become measurable and  Some research questions require adjust the provided general and
the Problem
 Statement of statistical analysis must be well-defined. major modifications to become specific objectives.
included, if applicable. measurable and well-defined.
 Some research questions are either
missing but relevant or lowly relevant
but present.
10 9-8 7-5 4-0
 The overall scope of work is described in  The overall scope of work and limitations  The overall scope of work and  The component was not
detail in terms of the extent of require minor clerical adjustments to reach limitations require major adjustments presented in the paper.
experimentation through the methods the prescribed form and detail. exhibited by the necessary addition of Or
Scope and
Limitations
prescribed as specific to the study. missed details and/or removal of  Simple identification of scope
 The overall limitations of the study describe irrelevant information. and limitations was done with
the setting of methodology procedures (e.g. barely relevant and significant
source of experimental units, location/agency details.
of testing, conditions unique to the study)
Methodology
Criteria Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Needs Improvement
20 19-16 15-11 10-0
 Appropriate research design was  A research design was established with  A research design was established  Components of the Research
established with well-defined relationship some minor modification with the with unclear relationship among design are vague and trivial.
among variables (independent, dependent, relationship among the identified variables. variables identified.
Research
and control.)  Treatment of data is described with the  Some of the treatment of data is
Design
 Treatment of data is appropriately described Indices/standards/ratings of unclear with needed improvement
with the Indices/standards/ratings of measurement/evaluative tools indicated with about the Indices/standards/ratings of
measurement/evaluative tools are correctly some minor modifications needed. measurement/evaluative tools used.
indicated.
20 19-16 15-11 10-0
Materials and Appropriate materials and processes done in Materials and processes done in the study Materials and processes done in the Important details of the materials
Methods the study was sufficiently and clearly was described with needed rearrangement of study are disorderly and lacks many and processes are not described
described in a logical manner. order and inclusion of additional details. details. or presented.
Criteria Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Needs Improvement

3 2 1 0
All and only in-text citations are listed in the Some references cited are missing. Some Majority of the References listed are not References are not Listed
References references and vice versa, following APA references included are not in-text cited. in APA format. In-text cited references
formatting. Some references are not APA formatted are not listed. References listed are not
in-text cited.
5 3-4 1-2 0
Technical The paper has satisfied scientific writing style, Minor errors on scientific writing style, Major errors on scientific writing style, Total revision is needed.
Writing conventions, grammar, and mechanics conventions, grammar, and mechanics are conventions, grammar, and mechanics
observed. are observed.
Plagiarism
5 3-4 1-2
0-25% Similarity with other online materials 25-30% Similarity with other online materials >30% Similarity with other online
using plagiarism checker using plagiarism checker materials using plagiarism checker

-engr.almdalilis

You might also like