Assessment Rubric For Literature Review Category

Assessment Rubric For Literature Reviewcategoryabcdfquantity Of Source

Assessment Rubric for Literature Review CATEGORY A B C D F Quantity of sources 10 pts. Document cites at least the required number of sources. One source under the required number of sources. Two – three sources under the required number of sources. Four to five sources under the required number of sources. More than five sources under the number of required sources. Credibility of Sources 20 pts. All sources cited can be considered credible or scholarly. Most sources cited can be considered credible or scholarly Some sources can be considered credible or scholarly Few sources cited can be considered credible or scholarly Little or no credible or scholarly sources cited. Evaluation of Sources 20 pts. Literature Review succinctly and comprehensively describe the source material; literature review offers great insight into the source material; Thoroughly explains why source was chosen (relates to topic). Most of the reviews are succinct; Most comprehensively describe the source material; Some offer insight into the source material; Offers some explanation of why the source was chose or Offers and explanation for most of the sources. Some reviews may be too short or too long; Annotations adequately describe the source material, but lack insight; Offers little explanation of why source was chosen or offers an explanation for why sources was chosen on only some of the sources. Few reviews meet the length requirements, few reviews adequately describe the source material; reviews offer little insight; Offers insight as to why the source was chose on only a few sources. Most reviews are either too short or too long; reviews do not describe the source material; reviews offer no insight; does not offer insight on why the source was chosen on any of the sources. Grammar and mechanics The entire literature review is thoughtful, complete, and well written. Written in third person. Most of the Literature Review is thoughtful, complete, and well written. Some of the Literature review is well written but some is lacking in completeness, thought, and /or writing quality (grammar and mechanics). Most of the literature review is lacking in completeness, thought, and/or writing quality (grammar and mechanics). All of the Literature Review is lacking in completeness, thought, and/or writing quality (grammar and mechanics). APA and Documentation 25 pts. Citations are formatted correctly in the document. There are a few formatting errors in the document’s citations. There are some formatting errors in the document’s citations. There are many and/or frequent formatting errors in the document’s citations. There is little or no adherence to APA format in the document.

Paper For Above instruction

The assignment requires a comprehensive literature review critically analyzing academic sources related to a specific research topic. The review must include at least the required number of credible or scholarly sources, providing a succinct and insightful description of each source’s content and relevance. Additionally, the review should detail why each source was selected, demonstrating a clear connection to the research focus. Proper adherence to grammar, mechanics, and APA citation formatting is essential for producing a high-quality, professional document.

Effective literature reviews serve as foundational elements in academic research by synthesizing existing knowledge, identifying gaps, and establishing context for new studies. A robust review not only summarizes pertinent literature but also offers critical insights into the methodologies, findings, and implications of each source, revealing how they contribute to the understanding of the research topic. Selecting reputable sources such as peer-reviewed journal articles, authoritative books, and credible reports enhances the reliability and scholarly value of the review.

Quantitative requirements are straightforward: the review must cite the mandated number of sources, with performance graded accordingly. For example, citing only one source or significantly fewer than required undermines the review’s credibility, while exceeding the minimum demonstrates thoroughness. The credibility of sources is equally critical; scholarly articles published in reputable journals or by established authors are preferable. Citing non-scholarly sources, such as blogs or biased reports, diminishes the academic rigor.

The evaluation of sources involves analyzing and describing their core content, methodology, and relevance, as well as explaining why they were chosen. A thorough annotation should include a concise summary, insight into the source’s contribution, and its pertinence to the research question. Superficial descriptions or lack of explanation weaken the review. Conversely, comprehensive annotations reveal critical engagement with the literature and clarity of purpose.

Mechanics and style contribute significantly to the professionalism of the review. The entire document should be written thoughtfully, ensuring clarity, coherence, and grammatical correctness. Writing in the third person maintains objectivity and professionalism. Common errors in mechanics or structure detract from the credibility of the work and may result in lower grades.

Finally, proper formatting according to APA guidelines is essential. All citations within the text must follow APA style, including author-date conventions, and corresponding entries should be accurately presented in the references section. Consistent formatting demonstrates attention to detail and scholarly integrity, which are vital in academic writing.

References

• Author, A. A. (Year). Title of the scholarly article. Journal Name, Volume(Issue), pages.
• Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of the book. Publisher.
• Author, D. D. (Year). Title of report. Institution or Organization.
• Author, E. E. (Year). Title of internet resource. Website Name.
• Author, F. F., & Author, G. G. (Year). Another relevant article. Another Journal, Volume(Issue), pages.
• Author, H. H. (Year). Title of another scholarly publication. Journal or Publisher.
• Author, I. I. (Year). Critical review of literature on topic. Research Journal, Volume(Issue), pages.
• Author, J. J. (Year). Empirical study related to topic. Journal of Research, Volume, pages.
• Author, K. K. (Year). Overview of methodology or theory. Academic Press.
• Author, L. L. (Year). Recent developments in the field. Science & Research, Volume, pages.