Final+Paper+Rubric


 * Research Paper Checklist **** (Final Paper = 50 points; Revised Final Paper = 50 points) **

REVISED FINAL PAPER GRADES (changes were made to some of the point distributions after our TA meeting fall 2005)
□ (0.5 pts) Did you include a title page that includes a concise, descriptive and scientific title? □ (0.5 pts) Did you include a list of authors in alphabetical order? □ (0 pts) Did you include the date? □ (- up to 1 pt) This section is of superior quality □ (2 pts) Did you include a concise abstract that describes your paper in full? □ (1 pt) Did you explain precisely your results in your abstract, including actual data? □ (1 pt) Is your abstract 200 words or less? □ (- up to 4 pts) This section is of superior quality □ In this order, did you include: □ (2 pts) an adequate introduction that is developed using the primary literature? (this should describe what is known about your topic and lead to….) □ (1 pts) how your study will fit into previously known knowledge? □ (2 pts) how your study fits into a broader conceptual framework? (i.e. go back to why it is important to study such topic) □ (2 pt) your research question(s) and hypothesis(es)? □ (1 pt) your predictions? □ (- up to 8 pts) This section is of superior quality □ (1 pt) Did you describe your study site and/or experimental location? □ (4 pts) Did you describe (in detail) your experimental design, including: □ how you selected your object/organisms/quadrates/sample, etc.? □ the variables you collected (both independent and dependent)? □ how you measured these variables? □ what materials/supplies/equipment that you used? □ how many samples you collected (replication)? □ how you sampled temporally? (when did you sample and what was your logic?) □ (1 pt) Did you state how you treated the data? (i.e. what statistical tests were used?) □ (1 pt) Did you explain calculations and graphs done with your data □ (1 pt) Did you include the equipment you used as you described your methods and **NOT** just list your equipment? □ (0 pts) Did you make sure to change the text of the methods section from future tense (from proposal) to past tense? □ (0 pts) Did you take away the timeline and sample data sheet included in your proposal? □ (- up to 8 pts) This section is of superior quality
 * __ Title Page __**
 * ( **** Final Paper = 0 points; Revised Final Paper = 1 point) **
 * __ Abstract: __** (half a page)
 * ( **** Final Paper = 4 points; Revised Final Paper = 4 points) **
 * __ Introduction: __** (2 to 3 pages)
 * ( **** Final Paper = 4 points; Revised Final Paper = 8 points) **
 * __ Methods: __** (2 to 3 pages)
 * ( **** Final Paper = 4 points; Revised Final Paper = 8 points) **

□ (-up to 4 pts) Did you only include the combined total of 5 figures and tables in the result section? □ (1 pt) Did you focus on the biological results and supplement them with statistics? □ (0.5 pts) Did you fully describe your results in the text, including actual numbers (means, standard deviations, etc)? □ (1 pt) Did you choose the appropriate statistical analysis(es) to analyze your data □ (1.5 pts) Did you properly apply your statistical analysis(es) to your data? □ (0.5 pts) Did you refer to all your tables and figures in the text in the correct order (the first figure cited should be Fig.1, etc)? □ (0.5 pts) Are your tables and figures complete and clear, in Times New Roman 12 font? □ (1 pt) Did you make sure to present analyzed or synthesized data? (Do not include your raw data and calculations. If your raw data are important to understanding your paper, you should include them as an appendix at the end of your paper.) □ (0 pts) Did you make sure to not discuss interpretations of your results in this section? (Interpretation is reserved for the Discussion section.) □ (- up to 6 pts) This section is of superior quality
 * __ Results: __** (1 to 2 pages)
 * ( **** Final Paper = 8 points; Revised Final Paper = 6 points) **

__ Figures and Tables __ (Final Paper = 4 points; Revised Final Paper = 2 points) □ (deduction made above) Did you only include the combined total of 5 figures and tables in the result section? □ (0.5 pts) Did you include adequate and descriptive captions for your tables and figures (including descriptive titles)? □ (0 pt) Did you include titles ONLY in the caption and not in the actual figure or table? (Titles should only be included in the captions even though Excel provides the option to have it in the figure or table) □ (0.25 pts) Are the captions located above the tables and the captions located below the figures? □ (0.5 pts) Did you include proper axis labels with the units? □ (0.5 pts) Did you include r or R2 values, t-test values, and p-values in your figures and tables? □ (0.25 pts) Is each figure important, with no information replicated from other figures? □ (- up to 2 pts) This section is of superior quality

□ (0.25 pts) Did you briefly summarize your main results? (This is usually the first paragraph or two.) □ (3 pts) Did you adequately interpret and analyze your results? (This is the bulk of this section.) □ (0.5 pts) Did you state whether or not your results support your hypotheses and predictions? □ (0.5 pts) Did you state your conclusions? □ (0.25 pts) Did you discuss other possible reasons for your results? (Use the literature and your creativity!) □ (0.25 pts) Did you state any methodological problems? □ (0.25 pts) What would you improve were you to redo this study? □ (0.5 pts) Did you compare your results with those of other studies? Are they similar/different, and how so? □ (0.5 pts) Did you include a developed paragraph outlining future research that could be done, how it should be directed, and what exactly you would do were you to carry it out? □ (2 pts) Did you place your study/conclusions back into a larger framework? (i.e. why is it important that we spend time looking at such subject, what important information does it bring us, how can such conclusions be applied?). **This is very important!** □ (0 pts) Did you finish your discussion with a strong conclusion? □ (- up to 8 pts) This section is of superior quality
 * __ Discussion: __** (at least 2 pages)
 * ( **** Final Paper = 12 points; Revised Final Paper = 8 points) **

□ (1 pt) Did you acknowledge those who gave you critical guidance (i.e. your TA, friends that read or proofread your paper), field assistance, statistical help, or permission to use private or public lands? □ (- up to 1 pts) This section is of superior quality
 * __ Acknowledgements: __** (a few sentences)
 * ( **** Final Paper = 1 point; Revised Final Paper = 1 point) **

□ (0.5 pts) Did you include a complete list of your sources? □ (2 pts) Did you use **at least 6 primary journal articles**? Are they all cited in the text? □ Did you cite your lab manual? □ (0.5 pts) Did you use the proper format **consistently**? (see Appendix III) □ (- up to 3 pts) This section is of superior quality
 * __ Literature Cited: __**
 * ( **** Final Paper = 4 points; Revised Final Paper = 3 points) **

** ( **** Final Paper = 1 point; Revised Final Paper = 1 point) **
□ (0.5 pts) Did you include the figures and tables from the results section and label it as Appendix 1? □ (0.5 pts) Did you include all your raw data in a properly labeled table format as Appendix 2, without any calculations? □ Are your appendices AFTER your Literature Cited section? □ (- up to 1 pt) This section is of superior quality  (1 pt) Did you check your spelling throughout your paper?  (1 pt) Did you check your grammar thoroughly? (tense should be consistent throughout paper)  (1 pt) Does your paper flow appropriately and include good transitions?  (0.5 pts) Did you check the organization of your paper?  (0.5 pts) Did you check the organization of each paragraph? Does each paragraph begin with a topic sentence? Is each of the following sentences related to the topic sentence?  (0.5 pts) Did you write in a scientific style? (i.e. in a concise, avoiding redundancy and using the appropriate vocabulary)?  (1 pt) Did you avoid using direct quotes? (paraphrase)  (0.5 pts) Did you proofread your work several times, even after spell and grammar checks?
 * __ Writing/Style: __**
 * ( **** Final Paper **** = 6 points; **** Revised Final Paper **** = 6 points) **

NOTE: This section you can grade differently if particular parts of this are missing/incomplete. □ (1 pt) Is your paper (excluding Title Page, Literature Cited, and Appendices) between 7 and 10 pgs long? □ Is the text double-spaced with 1-inch margins and 12 pt Times New Roman font? (including the Literature Cited section) □ Did divide your paper into the proper headings? (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results,  Discussion, Acknowledgments, Literature Cited) □ Did you correctly cite your sources in the text? (see Appendix III) □ Did you number your pages? □ Did you clearly number and label your appendices, and refer to them in the text in the correct order? □ (1 pt) Did you attach your proposal (for both the Final Paper and the Revised Final Paper) and the Final Paper (only for the Revised Final Paper)?
 * __ Basic Reminders __**
 * ( **** Final Paper = 2 points; Revised Final Paper = 2 points) **

= = __Grading and Potential Problems with the Revised Final Paper__ General problems with the Revised Final Paper: - comments from proposal/rough draft not addressed (typos, etc not fixed) = -5 - forget some sections, like acknowledgments, raw data = see checklist - raw data not in proper tables, with calculations included = see checklist - abstract: not all the parts of the paper are represented (need to include main results and conclusions) = see checklist - methods: forget to include stats and calculations done = see checklist - results: forget stats on graphs, duplicate information (put it both in a table and on a graph), problems with caption (need information, things like abbreviations used), forget to conclude their t-tests: are the populations different? = see checklist - discussion: summary of results should be short
 * Grades earned on the final write-up of your research will reflect the quality of the overall project (including effort put forth in collecting data) as well as your ability to work cooperatively in a group. If in the rare case the TA has reason to believe that an individual did not contribute to the group project, that student will receive a zero on this assignment.**
 * Too long: 3 pts off for every 1 page past 11 pgs
 * Too short: 3 pts off for every 1 page under 6 pgs
 * Turned it in late: a. within the first 20 min of class = no deduction, b. after first 20 minutes of class but before end of the class period without a proper excuse = -10, c. turned it in after class without a proper excuse = -50.
 * Did not include 6 primary literature sources = -6 if 4 or less, -3 if have 5 (note: this is more than the points for that section, but a very major portion of the paper, thus I feel we should take off additional points if they have less than 6 sources)
 * Reminder: make sure you do NOT tell the students the exact point distribution within each specific section (as listed below) to avoid them arguing for every partial point possible.