journal article reviews grading rubric 100 Points Criteria Levels of Achievement Criteria Advanced 92-100 (A- to A): Satisfies criteria w/ excellence Proficient 84-91 (B- to B+) : Satisfies criteria at the graduate level Developing 76-83 (C- to C+): Satisfies most criteria Below Expectations 1-75 (F to D+): Does not satisfy criteria Not Present Points Earned Content 70%: 70 Points 65-70 Points 59-64 Points 53-58 Points 0-52 Points 0 points 35 points 33-35 points Student meets the requirements as listed in the “Proficient” column but provides more extensive explanation (concisely written and without wordiness) In addition, student demonstrates full understanding of key ideas supporting the main points, 30-32 points Student provides summary of salient/main points that is concisely worded but of sufficient length to adequately provide a reasonably complete review of the article Summary includes all major topics of the article (if the article is a research study, briefly describes hypotheses, methods, results, 27-29 points Student includes some of the requirements in the “Proficient” column Student may not clearly distinguish main points from peripheral or supporting ideas 1-26 points Student clearly deviates from the requirements in the “Proficient” column Student may omit many key ideas from the summary Student may incorrectly review key research elements in an 0 Points
Structure 30%: 30 points 28-30 Points 26-27 Points 23-25 Points 1-22 Points Writing and Clarity: 20 points 19-20 points Student demonstrates “professional writing” as mentioned under the “Proficient” column and described by DCCC. Beyond that, writing is superb with excellent flow of ideas and is totally free of errors. 17-18 points Student demonstrates “professional writing” as defined by DCCC. This would include proper sentence construction, paragraph organization, transitions, and logical flow of ideas. 16 Paper exhibits some writing that would not be considered “professional” and has some basic writing errors. 1-15 points Paper significantly deviates from the requirements mentioned in the “Proficient” column. 0 points Writing Mechanics and 10 points 10 points Paper is totally free of mechanical errors and follows APA fully. 9 points Student largely follows APA for formatting, citations, use of quotes, etc. 8 points Paper exhibits a number of mechanical and APA errors 1-7 points Paper exhibits numerous deviations from the elements mentioned in the Proficient 0 points
Content Reflection (15 Points) Reflection is approximately 1 page of text and includes: “Initial response to the article was given Missing/Partial “Design/methodology” was discussed (if appropriate) Missing/partial “Insights gained” were discussed. Missing/partial “Reasons for interest in topic” were- discussed Missing/partial “Future research interest based on topic” was discussed. Missing/partial Thoughtful and insightful Good connection to core ideas in the article Good insights Your “Reflection” did not adequately relate to the content of the article. This section was not sufficiently developed (1 page min.) More effort needed to “connect” with the concepts in the article. Application Application is approximately 1 page of text and includes. Student has applied the article’s core ideas to a specific human services counseling situation (describe the scenario and counseling issue). Article’s ideas clearly integrated, applied, and cited. Needs more work Core ideas not adequately integrated Core ideas not adequately applied Interesting counseling scenario More work is needed to incorporate/integrate the core ideas of the article into your counseling scenario. For example, the article dealt with integration of Scriptures as well as prayer. In the future, please describe a specific human services counseling situation (case study, etc.). See my Sample Journal Article Review In-text citations need to be used for the core ideas that you are incorporating into your clinical scenario.