•  
  •  
 

Review Criteria

Articles are reviewed based on the following criteria: A well-written article; significance and purpose of the research well described for a multi-disciplinary audience; well-developed research and methodology; thoughtfully interpreted and analyzed results; excellent utilization of supporting materials or references; a non-repetitive, efficiently organized, convincing and easy-to-follow article.

Review Rubric

Criteria Weight
Exemplary (x4)
Good (x3)
Adequate (x2)
Needs Significant
Improvement (x1)
Missing
Research topic or Question Clearly articulated topic/question with logical, supportive background information Clear topic/ question but some background confusion/unclear; additional details needed Topic/question good but background missing, details needed Topic/question vague or weak; little to no background provided  
points 80 60 40 20 0
Project plan or how the question is to be answered  Strong evidence of thought and planning (details clearly articulated) Good evidence of thought and planning (some details missing or confusing)   Some evidence of thought and planning (few details or plan not presented logically) OR multiple minor flaws in plan   Little evidence of thought or planning (little to no details; confusing) OR significant flaws in plan    
points 80 60 40 20 0
Significance or impact of project  Clearly articulated, strong statement of why this project is important (can be limited to student impact)  Good effort to describe project's importance; could be stated more clearly (can be limited to student impact)  Some effort to describe project's importance;  explanation may be difficult to understand  Little to no reference to project importance or not understandable (can be limited to student impact)  
points 60 45 30 15 0
Relevant results Clearly articulated results that are wellaligned with project goals  Results aligned with project goals, but could be presented more clearly  Adequate results, but isolated areas lacking clarity/details  Results incomplete, with little to no details provided   
points 80 60 40 20 0
Writing style  Clear, persuasive, and logical and well organized with little to no errors  Good overall; minor issues with clarity, logic, or level of detail; few errors Adequate writing;  isolated areas lacking clarity/ details or too many errors  Poorly written overall; confusing, lacking necessary details; excessive or significant errors   
points 40 30 20 10 0
Format Instructions Excellent formatting with little to no errors   Good overall; minor issues with formatting  Adequate format, but isolated areas have too many errors Little effort to follow format instructions in submission guidelines  
points 32 24 16 8 0