LITERATURE REVIEW RUBRIC CONR 701 Advanced Research and Writing

Adapted from Criteria for Evaluation of Literature Reviews 2003 Rosemary Green & Mary Bowser

Criteria and

Qualities Not Rated

EMERGING

COMPETENT

STRONG

1. Landmark

studies. Historical background.

No clear mention of landmark studies or historical literature.

Brief reference to landmark studies. Brief mention of historical literature.

Good use of landmark studies with some analysis. Good use of historical literature.

Critical examination of landmark studies. Thorough reference to historical literature.

2. Organization and subtopics.

Lacking organization and / or subtopics.

Organization present but unclear. Subtopics unclear or inappropriate. Supporting literature is inadequate.

Good presentation of subtopics; most subtopics are appropriate, follow logical sequence. Supporting literature is inadequate.

Subtopics thoroughly developed through relevant literature. Subtopics are appropriate and follow logical sequence.

3. Quality of literature.

No scholarly or empirical research literature.

Little scholarly or empirical research literature.

Good emphasis upon relevant scholarly and empirical research studies. Importance of studies partially established.

Thorough reference to most important scholarly and empirical studies. Importance of literature clearly established.

4. Interpretation of literature.

Literature reported but not interpreted.

Writing occasionally expresses interpretation but often takes literature at face value.

Analysis, critique, and understanding of research literature partially demonstrated.

Writing is evaluative, interpretive, and clear. Understanding of literature thoroughly demonstrated.

5. Synthesis: Relevance of literature to current topic.

No mention of literatures relationship to current topic.

Brief mention of literatures relationship to current topic; explanation lacking.

Good explanation of literatures relationship to current topic.

Explicit relationship between relevant literature and current topic consistently demonstrated.

6. Synthesis: Relevance of sources to each other.

No mention of relationships among sources. Written in the style of an annotated bibliography.

Brief mention of relationships among some sources. Written in the style of an annotated bibliography.

Good explanation of relationships among sources with some analysis and critique.

Thorough, critical development of relationships among sources. Sources analyzed for differences and commonalities.

LITERATURE REVIEW RUBRIC CONR 701 Advanced Research and Writing

Adapted from Criteria for Evaluation of Literature Reviews 2003 Rosemary Green & Mary Bowser

Criteria and

Qualities Not Rated

EMERGING

COMPETENT

STRONG

7. Need for and

contribution of current study.

Need for and contribution of current study not stated.

Need for and contribution of current study stated unclearly or follows poor logic.

Need for and contribution of current study stated and marginally supported by the literature.

Need for the study and its contributions consistently, logically, and clearly explained and supported by the literature.

8. Mechanics (spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, word usage).

Many errors. (10 or more) Frequent errors. (5-9) Few errors. (1-4) No errors.

9. Bibliographic format.

Multiple errors in text citations, bibliography entries, and/or document format.

Some text or bibliography citations incorrect or missing. Document format is inconsistent.

Appropriate citations within text and bibliography. Few inconsistencies and errors.

All citations present and correctly formatted. Document correctly formatted.