Community Medicine – Research Grading Rubric

Summer 2020
Group Member ID #s : _______________________/____________________/______________________/_______________________/_________________

FACULTY CHAIRS: When grading: parts 1 -4 & part 7 are based on their thesis chps 1-3 — while parts 5& 6 in the rubric are from the HU proposal form

Rubric for Summer Grade on Research Report (80 points total)

POOR AVERAGE/ADEQUATE EXCELLENT

REFLECTING A BEGINNING LEVEL OF REFLECTING DEVELOPMENT AND MOVEMENT REFLECTING THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF
PERFORMANCE. NEEDS NUMEROUS TOWARD MASTERY OF PERFORMANCE. HAD BASICS PERFORMANCE. ADDRESSED CONCEPTS, HAD
GRADING REVISIONS FOR CRITERIA BUT NOT SUPPORTING INFORMATION SUPPORTING INFORMATION & EXPLAINED
CRITERIA HOW RELEVANT

PART 1 Is present but does not clearly presents key Is present and gives overview of study importance & Is present and concisely presents relevance &
ABSTRACT concepts from study to aZract readers / is findings & within word limit (200 words) finding with in word limit (200 words)/ draws
5 POINTS over word limit (200 words) reader in to read full paper
Has 1-2 key words iden]fied, or choice needs review
Missing key words Has 3-6 key appropriate key words
PART 2 Missing – must be completed or totally Has a 1 sentence with the main research objec]ve Clear gives bulleted objec]ves for their
OBJECTIVES revised required research study. Correctly iden]fies primary
5 POINTS and secondary
HYPOTHESIS & Contains poorly worded research Contains somewhat clearly and correctly worded Contains clearly and correctly worded research
5 POINTS hypothesis(es) inconsistent with the research hypothesis(es) fairly consistent with the hypothesis(es) consistent with the proposal’s
proposal’s focus, or lacks a research proposal’s focus.. may want to reconsider if 1 or 2 focus. Correctly uses Ho & Ha and well
hypothesis. sided in alterna]ve is beZer thought out as to if 1 or 2 sided
IMPORTANCE OF OmiZed or less than 2 sentences given as to Has iden]fied in a paragraph how /why their study is In less than 2 pages – clearly explains the
STUDY why they study is important. important in general. Has some understanding but problem related to their study and why/how
5 POINTS lacks clear details this study can contribute to a beZer
understanding of the problem in the
community.

clearly ]es it community at risk and has cited a

minimum of 2 references showing how it
builds on previous studies
PART 3 No developed research topic is presented.
LITERATURE The topics’ significance is missing or unclear
REVIEW Scholarly works are not included or are not
15 PTS connected to the topic
Material from other authors appears to have
been cut-and-pasted into text
Subsec]ons are poorly organized and are
vague and lack explana]on and evidence
regarding the connec]on between each
independent and dependent variable
consistent with the hypothesis
Is less than 3 pages
Has only 5 or less references used
PART 4 Methods sec]on does not contain a specific
METHODS design or method for the quan]ta]ve
3 PT components of the study, or its descrip]on is
vague.
SAMPLING & Does not contain a descrip]on of sampling
POPULATION frame, sampling method, an]cipated sample
3 PT size, and a general demographic descrip]on
of study par]cipants, or mul]ple elements
above are missing or are vague.
poorly describes, or does not describe, how
informed consent is obtained, how
par]cipants’ confiden]ality or anonymity is
ensured
CONSTRUCTS Does not discuss main constructs and or
RELIABILITY & provides no discussion on ways to establish
VALIDITY reliability or validity
3 PT
The research topic is vaguely presented, or too many The research topic is clearly ar]culated & the
ideas are presented. significance is presented in a logical and
The significance of the topic is presented in a general specific manner
way, or the informa]on provided is not clearly
connected to the topic Up-to-date scholarly works
Scholarly works cited may not be current. Cited at least 15 references
Has between 7-15 references
Each subsec]on is well-organized and explains
Material from other authors is credited and used aswith evidence (i.e., an integrated review of
suppor]ng evidence relevant literature) the connec]on between
Each subsec]on is somewhat organized and aZempts each independent and dependent variable
to explain with evidence the connec]on. Yet, paper consistent with the hypothesis
lacks some evidence and/or somewhat weak
presenta]on of argument. More than 7 pages but kept to a maximum of
15.
Averages 3-7 pages
Methods sec]on contains a general design or method Methods clearly describes study design, how it
for the quan]ta]ve and/or qualita]ve components of will be implements& appropriate analysis of
the study or is somewhat incomplete in iden]fying proposed variables at all three levels
and describing the design. (univariate, bivariate, and mul]variate).
Methods sec]on aZempts to describe the sampling Methods sec]on contains a specific sampling
frame, sampling method, an]cipated sample size, frame, sampling method, an]cipated sample
and a general demographic descrip]on of study size, and a general demographic descrip]on of
par]cipants. However, an element above is missing or prospec]ve study par]cipants.
is somewhat vague.
sec]on describes how informed consent is
sec]on vaguely describes how informed consent is obtained, how par]cipants’ confiden]ality or
obtained, how par]cipants’ confiden]ality or anonymity is ensured
anonymity is ensured
Iden]fies main constructs used and if sourced from Addresses main constructs of study and how
where & if has established reliability or validity they will determine reliability or validity in
new measures and/or gives ci]ng and
reliability /validity of sources adopted in study
DATA Methods sec]on poorly describes, or lacks Methods sec]on somewhat describes appropriate Methods sec]on describes appropriate
COLLECTION & descrip]on of appropriate analysis of analysis of proposed variables. analysis of proposed variables includes
PROPOSED proposed variables appropriate descrip]ve and inferen]al tests
ANALYSIS But tests may need to be revised and corrected for the data collected
6 POINTS Does not describe how data will collected
Descries briefly how data will be collected but not all Clearly explains how data is to be collected,
details of where/ when & how stored from where and when & how it will be stored
PART 5 None adequately addressed for HU form, or Iden]fies what results they will be looking for begins Iden]fies what results they will be looking for
RESEARCH incomplete and requires revision before with descrip]ve data and one type of inferen]al begins with descrip]ve data and moves into
OUTCOMES submission sta]s]cal analysis inferen]al sta]s]cal analysis (min of 2
10 POINTS different tests used

Clearly & appropriately iden]fies study

limita]ons, poten]al biases, and
generalizability
PART 6 Sec]on is not completed on HU form must Has a general 2-3 points on how when study is being Clearly delineated the different phases of the
TIMELINE be revised for submission done but does not define who is responsible for each research project and who is responsible for
5 POINTS each part
BUDGET Sec]on on HU Form is not completed and Sec]on is completed as required, uses NA when if not Students who have requested funding have
5 POINTS must be revised for submission requested, but may need to adjust figures or clearly delineated required funds in the
subsec]ons appropriate subsec]ons and NA when not
appropriate
PART 7 Does not follow APA format consistently in APA is mostly used correctly with in text cita]ons, but APA is used correctly and consistently in both
USE OF APA either text of references has a few minor errors in the references that need to the references and in text cita]ons.
FORMATTING be corrected.
FOR TEXT Revisions to both required
CITATIONS &
REFERENCES
5 PTS
GRAMMAR & Wri]ng is difficult to follow because of Wri]ng generally follows the gramma]cal and Wri]ng follows the gramma]cal and spelling
SPELLING numerous errors in spelling and grammar spelling conven]ons of standard English conven]ons of standard English
5 PTS Dic]on is formal, avoiding “I” and “we,” slang,
MUST be rewriZen before submiZed May have included 1st person 1-2 ]mes
and contrac]ons

Id # & Names of group members: CommiPee Chair: _______________

Final grade: _________/80______