Report Introduction Evaluation Form

(1)

Report Introduction Evaluation Form

Category Excellent (85% - 100%) Good (70% - 84%) Fair (< 70%)

References - All required references were included and used to formulate the introduction.

- Most required references were included and used to formulate the introduction.

- Few required references were included and used in the text to formulate the introduction.

Objectives - All research objectives were listed and clearly stated

- Some research objectives were not listed OR not clearly stated

- Some research objectives were not listed AND not clearly stated

Research Question/Study Problem

- Research questions/ problems presented clearly and their importance discussed

- Research questions/ problems not presented clearly, OR their

importance not discussed

- Research questions/ problems not presented clearly, AND their importance not discussed Structure - Paragraphs are of appropriate

sequence and concisely written

- Paragraphs are of inappropriate sequence, OR not concisely written

- Paragraphs are of inappropriate sequence, AND not concisely written

Attractiveness - Clear and neatly bound in a titled cover.

- Print too small or too large, papers stapled together.

- Illegible writing, loose paper.

Mechanics (Grammar &

Spelling)

- There were no grammatical/

spelling mistakes.

- There were up to 5 grammatical/

spelling mistakes.

- There were more than 5 grammatical/ spelling mistakes.

Documentations - All citations appeared in the reference list, and all references are cited in text.

- Not all citations appeared in the reference list, OR not all

references are cited in text.

- Not all citations appeared in the reference list, AND not all references are cited in text.

Timeliness - Handed in on time - 10% of grade is deducted for each day passed the deadline date.

- 10% of grade is deducted for each day passed the deadline date.

(2)

Report Literature Review Evaluation Form

References - All required references were included and used to formulate the literature.

- Most required references were included and used to formulate the literature.

- Few required references were included and used to formulate the literature.

Quality of

Information/Evidence

- Paper was well researched in detail with accurate and critical evidence from a variety of sources

- Some aspects of paper was researched with some accurate evidence from limited sources

- Limited information on topic with lack of research detail or historically accurate evidence

Organization/

Development of Ideas

- Demonstrated clear and logical continuity between previous and present work with very well transition between paragraphs.

- Somewhat demonstrated clear and logical continuity between previous and present work with acceptable transition between paragraphs.

- Lacked clear and logical continuity between previous and present work with weak transition between paragraphs.

Structure - Paragraphs are of appropriate sequence and concisely written

- Paragraphs are of inappropriate sequence, OR not concisely written

- Paragraphs are of inappropriate sequence, AND not concisely written

Spelling)

spelling mistakes.

Documentation - All citations appeared in the reference list, and all references are cited in text.

Timeliness - Handed in on time. - 10% of grade is deducted for each day passed the deadline date.

(3)

Report Materials & Methods Evaluation Form

Study Design/Type - Study design was adequately described

- Study design was not adequately described.

- Study design was not described.

Participants/

Population

- Characteristics and demographics of participants were adequately described.

- Characteristics and demographics of participants were not adequately described.

- Characteristics and

demographics of participants were not described.

Sampling Methods - Sampling method was adequately described.

- Sampling method was not adequately described.

- Sampling method was not described.

Administrative Methods

- Administrative steps were adequately described.

- Administrative steps were not adequately described.

- Administrative steps were not described.

Materials - Materials used were adequately described.

- Materials used were not adequately described.

- Materials used were not described.

Technical

Design/Procedure

- Adequately described each step in the execution of the research.

- Did not adequately describe each step in the execution of the

research.

- Did not describe some steps in the execution of the research.

Study Variables - Dependent and independent variables were adequately described.

- Dependent and independent variables were not adequately described.

- Dependent and independent variables were not described.

Statistical Analysis - Statistical analysis methods were appropriate and adequately

described.

- Statistical analysis methods were not appropriate OR not adequately described.

- Statistical analysis methods were not appropriate AND not adequately described.

Structure - Paragraphs were of appropriate sequence and concisely written

- Paragraphs were of inappropriate sequence OR not concisely written

- Paragraphs were of

inappropriate sequence AND not concisely written

Mechanics (Grammar

& Spelling)

spelling mistakes.

(4)

Report Results Evaluation Form

Tables - Appropriate for type of data - Fulfilled requirements of table - Self explanatory

- Failed to fulfill at least 1 of the tables’ criteria.

- Failed to fulfill at least 2 of the tables’ criteria.

Figures - Appropriate for type of data - Fulfilled requirements of graph - Attractive color and design - Scale and form are appropriate

- Failed to fulfill at least 1 of the figures’ criteria.

- Failed to fulfill at least 2 of the figures’ criteria.

Documentation - All tables and figures were referred to in the text.

- Some tables and figures were referred to in the text.

- Tables and figures were not referred to in the text.

Statistical Analysis &

Significance tests

- Statistical analysis method used was appropriate for data types - Tests of significance used were appropriate for testing hypothesis - Level of significance was clearly stated

- Statistical analysis used was inappropriate for data types, OR - Tests of significance used were inappropriate for testing the hypothesis, OR

- Level of significance was not clearly stated

- Statistical analysis used was inappropriate for data types, AND - Tests of significance used were inappropriate for testing the hypothesis, AND

- Level of significance was not clearly stated

Structure - A balanced mix of text and tables/figures

- Results were not repeated in several places.

- Paragraphs were of appropriate sequence and concisely written

- Tables/figures only were reported, OR

- Some results were repeated in several places, OR

- Paragraphs were of inappropriate sequence or not concisely written

- Tables/figures only were reported, AND

- Most results were repeated in several places, AND

- Paragraphs were of inappropriate sequence and not concisely written

Spelling)

spelling mistakes.

(5)

Report Discussion Evaluation Form

References - All required references were included and used to formulate the discussion.

- Most required references were included and used to formulate the discussion.

- Few required references were included and used in the text to formulate the discussion.

Body of Text - Discussion was relevant to topic.

- Discussed all major findings.

- Discussed similarities and

differences between results and the work of others.

- Did not repeat points already made.

- Failed to fulfill at least 1 of the discussion criteria.

- Failed to fulfill at least 2 of the discussion criteria.

Structure - Paragraphs were of appropriate sequence and concisely written

- Paragraphs were of inappropriate sequence OR not concisely written

- Paragraphs were of inappropriate sequence AND not concisely written

Spelling)

spelling mistakes.

Documentation - All citations appeared in the reference list, and all references are cited in text.

(6)

Report Conclusion, Recommendations, and Study Limitations Evaluation Form

Strengths &

Limitations

- Limitations in the study, or applicability or generalizability of results were adequately discussed.

- Limitations in the study or applicability or generalizability of results were not adequately discussed.

- Limitations in the study or applicability or generalizability of results were not discussed.

Recommendations - Recommendations were related to the original theory or study questions/objectives.

- Areas for further study were suggested.

- Recommendations were not related to the original theory or study questions/objectives, OR - Areas for further study were not suggested.

- Recommendations were not related to the original theory or questions/objectives, AND - Areas for further study were not suggested.

Conclusion - A concise summary of study results that highlights major findings was adequately written.

- A concise summary of study results that highlights major findings was not adequately written.

- A concise summary of study results that highlights major findings was not written.

Structure - Paragraphs are of appropriate sequence and concisely written

- Paragraphs are of inappropriate sequence OR not concisely written

- Paragraphs are of inappropriate sequence AND not concisely written

Spelling)

spelling mistakes.

Timeliness - Handed in on time - 10% of grade is deducted for each day passed the deadline date.