Final Literature Review

Clearly states a specific problem, gives a brief, succinct background, and indicates why solving it is important.

5 pts

Identifies a problem and gives some background and indication of importance

4 pts

Identifies a problem, but the statement is too broad. Little indication of the background or importance of the problem.

3 pts

Statement of the problem is weak, omitted, or inappropriate. No background given and no indication of its importance is given.

2 pts

Structure is intuitive and sufficiently grounded to each of the key constructs and variables of the proposed study. The review was organized using subheadings. The review was suitably organized considering the contents of the selected articles.

20 pts

A workable structure has been presented for presenting relevant literature related to the constructs and variables of the proposed study. The review was suitably organized considering the contents of the selected articles.

16 pts

The structure of the literature review is weak; it does not identify important ideas, constructs or variables related to the research purpose, questions, or context. Organization made the review difficult to follow at times.

14 pts

The structure of the literature review is incomprehensible, irrelevant, or confusing. The review was minimally organized and writing was difficult to follow throughout.

13 pts

Narrative integrates critical and logical details from appropriate literature. Key constructs and variables were connected. Attention is given to different perspectives and opinion vs. evidence. The findings and results of articles were thoughtfully compared, contrasted and/or connected to each other. The review concluded with a summary of the knowledge found from this review and related the knowledge gain to the inquiry question.

20 pts

Key constructs and variables were usually connected to appropriate literature. The findings of articles were usually compared, contrasted and/or connected to each other. The review concluded with an adequate summary.

16 pts

A key construct or variable was not connected to the research literature. Selected literature was from unreliable sources. Literary supports were vague or ambiguous. The findings of references were mentioned with little and/or no comparison or connection to each other. An inadequate attempt was made to summarize the findings of the review.

14 pts

The review of literature was missing or consisted of nonresearch based articles. Propositions were irrelevant, inaccurate, or inappropriate. No attempt was made to connect references. No attempt to summarize the findings of the review was made.

13 pts

Articulates a clear, reasonable, and succinct research question or questions. Connection with the literature review is clear and obvious.

10 pts

Research questions are stated, connected to the research issue, and supported by the literature.

8 pts

Attempt is made to state a research question or questions, but question(s) is/are unclear and doesn’t/don’t’ follow logically from the literature review

7 pts

Research question(s) omitted or poorly stated. No attempt to connect the question(s) to the literature review.

6 pts

Framework is solidly grounded in the literature review. Connections are clear and accurate. Relationships among variables are clearly and accurately explained. Theory underlying the relations is clearly explained.

20 pts

Framework is largely grounded in the literature review. Connections are largely clear and accurate. Good attempt is made to explain the relationships among variables and the theory underlying the relations.

16 pts

Attempt is made to ground the framework in the literature review. Connections are sometimes unclear. Attempt is made to explain the relationships among variables, but it is often unclearly or inaccurate. Attempt is made to explain the theory underlying the relations.

14 pts

No attempt to explain the theoretical framework is made or no attempt is made to ground the framework in the literature review.

13 pts

Hypotheses are clearly stated using appropriate language and/or symbols. Relationship between hypotheses and theoretical framework is clear. Hypotheses are expressed in the form of testable statements.

5 pts

Hypotheses are stated using in appropriate language and/or symbols, but statement is somewhat inaccurate. Relationship between hypotheses and theoretical framework is established, but could be clearer. Hypotheses are expressed in the form of testable statements.

4 pts

Attempt is made to state the hypotheses in appropriate language and/or symbols but statement is largely inaccurate. Relationship between hypotheses and theoretical framework is vague. Hypotheses are sometimes not expressed in the form of testable statements.

3 pts

Little attempt is made to state the hypotheses in appropriate language and/or symbols. Relationship between hypotheses and theoretical framework is not stated or is inaccurate. Hypotheses are not expressed in the form of testable statements.

2 pts

At least 7 appropriate references were used and each specifically related to the question. Standards of APA formatting were followed with very few errors.

10 pts

At least 5 appropriate references were used that were related to the question. Standards of APA formatting were followed but with some errors.

8 pts

Fewer than 5 references were used and were marginally related to the question. Attempt was made to follow standards of APA formatting but there were frequent errors.

7 pts

Inappropriate references not related to the question were used. No attempt was made to follow standards of APA formatting or marginal attempt was made but there were numerous errors.

6 pts

Consistently applied standards of English composition. There were no grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation errors and transitional phrases were used to guide the reader throughout the text. Assignment submitted on time.

5 pts

Paper conformed to most standards of English composition. There was an occasional grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation error. Timeliness of delivery was acceptable.

4 pts

Weak, incomplete, ambiguous, or inconsistent application of rules of English composition. There were frequent grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation errors. Delivery was delinquent.

3 pts

Failure to apply standard rules for English composition. There were many grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation errors that distracted the reader from the content of the writing. Delivery was delinquent.

2 pts

Consistently applied APA guidelines in regards to citations, references, headings, table of contents, page numbers, and running headers.

5 pts

Manuscript conformed to most APA guidelines.

4 pts

Weak, incomplete, ambiguous, or inconsistent application of APA formatting.

3 pts

Failure to apply APA rules for manuscript presentation.

2 pts

Meets Expectations

1 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations

0 pts