ScoreTitle PageTOTAL POINTS Description of Rating ScaleTitle PageReview of LiteratureStatement of the ProblemOperational DefinitionsStudy significanceSubject DescriptionProceduresControlling variablesReferencesMini-Proposal RubricScoreTitle PageReview of LiteratureStatement of the ProblemOperational DefinitionsStudy SignificanceSubject DescriptionProceduresControlling VariablesReferencesTOTAL POINTS Description of Rating ScaleTitle Page5: Is appropriate in tone and structure to education journals, contain necessary descriptors (subjects,independent (IV) and dependent variables (DV)), and allows readers to anticipate design4: Is appropriate in tone and structure to education journal, most descriptors present; identifies problemand experimentation, suggests design but lacks all descriptors3: Identifies problem but does not allow the reader to anticipate the design2: Identifies one descriptor, lacks design information or is misleading1: Is not relevant to the intended study or is missing Review of Literature5: The review of literature is appropriate, provides background information and a critique of previousresearch that points out weaknesses, conflicts and areas of needed study4: The review of literature is appropriate, most background information provided, critique points outsome but not all of the areas of needed study.3: The review of literature provides most of the background information2: The review of literature provides some of the background information1: The review of literature is provides little of the background information Statement of the Problem5: The problem statement is concise, includes descriptor variables and informs the reader of the exactpurpose of the study4: The statement of the problem includes most of the descriptor variables and informs the reader of theexact purpose of the study3: The statement of the problem includes 1 descriptor variable and informs the reader of the purpose ofthe study2: The statement of the problem is unclear and does not include any descriptor variables1: The statement of the problem is missing or is unclear and unable to be interpreted 1Operational Definitions5: Basic assumptions are stated and specify certain conditions that must exist for the study to proceed,limitations or possible shortcomings are acknowledged by the researcher4: Most basic assumptions are state and the shortcoming of the study are acknowledged by theresearcher3: A few basic assumptions are stated and the researcher does not mention the potential shortcomings ofthe study.2: The operational definitions are not clearly specified in the introduction1: The operational definitions are missing from the introduction Study significance5: The introduction emphasizes contradictory findings and limitations of previous research and the waysin which the paper will contribute to further knowledge about the research topic4: The introduction emphasizes most contradictory findings and limitation of previous research and howthe paper will contribute to further knowledge about the research topic3: The introduction emphasizes some contradictory findings and limitations but makes no predictionshow the paper will contribute to further knowledge2: The introduction provides a few contradictory findings and limitations1: The study significance is missing Subject Description5: The Method specifies who the subjects will be, how they will be chosen, how many will participateand any special characteristics of importance; a description of how the subject’s rights will beprotected is included.4: The Method specifies most of the descriptors regarding subjects and how subject rights will beprotected3: The Method specifies most of the descriptors regarding subjects2: The Method section specifies a few of the descriptors regarding subject1: The Method section does not identify subject characteristics Procedures5: Contains effectively, quantifiably, concisely organized information that allows the experiment to bereplicated, it is written so that all information inherent to the paper can be related back to this section,identifies the techniques used in data collection in the appropriate chronology, does not containunnecessary wordy descriptions of procedures4: As above, but contains unnecessary information and or wordy descriptions within the section3: Presents an experiment that is replicable, all information in document is related, however, fails toidentify some sources of data and/or represents information that is disorganized.2: Presents an experiment that is marginally replicable; parts of the basic design must be inferred by thereader; procedures not quantitatively or clearly described.1: Describes the experiment poorly in a non-scientific way such that it cannot be replicated Controlling variables5: Student demonstrates by written statement, the ability to control variables (internal and externalvalidity factors) by using randomization and other procedures24: As above, student demonstrates an adequate control of variables3: Student demonstrates the ability to control important variables; Method section does not indicateknowledge of randomization2: Student demonstrates the ability to control some, but not all, of the important variablesexperimentally1: Student demonstrates a lack of understanding about controlling variables References5: Reference list is relevant, complete and broad enough to support the Introduction and is in correctAPA format.4: Reference list is limited and is in correct APA format3: Reference list includes non-relevant articles and is not in APA format2: Reference list is incomplete and format is incorrect1: No Reference list is