Criterion | Missing (2) | Developmental (4) | Accomplished (6) | Exemplary (8) |
Abstract | Omissions or incomplete description of abstract | Title or abstract lacks relevance or fails to offer appropriate details about the issue, variables, context, or methods of the proposed study | Title and abstract are relevant, offering details about the proposed research study. | Title and abstract are informative, succinct, and offer sufficiently specific details about the issue, variables, context, and proposed methods of the study. |
Introduction | Any components of the statement of the problem, significance, purpose of the study, were omitted or inappropriate. | Although a research issue is identified, the statement is too broad, or the description fails to establish the importance of the problem area. Connections to the literature are unclear, debatable, or insignificant | Identifies a relevant research issue. Connections established with the literature | Articulates a specific, significant problem by connecting that problem to the real world. Statements of purpose flows logically from the introduction. The research problem and the statement of significance clearly establishes relevance. |
Summary of prior research (Min 2 references) | The review of prior research was missing or consisted of non- research-based articles. Propositions were irrelevant, inaccurate, or inappropriate. | A key construct or variable was not connected to the prior research review. Selected literature was from unreliable sources. Literary supports were vague or ambiguous. | Key constructs and variables were connected to relevant, reliable theoretical and research literature | Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the prior research. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence. |
Research Design | The research design is inappropriate or has not been identified and or described using standard terminology. Limitations and assumptions are omitted. Description of the variables were not identified, and operationalization was not addressed. | The research design is confusing or incomplete given the research questions and sampling strategy. Important limitations and assumptions have not been identified. Description of variables were confusing, incomplete, or lacked relevance to the research questions. Operationalization of variables was incomplete or not well considered | The research design has been identified and described in sufficiently detailed terms. Some limitations and assumptions have been identified. Variables were identified by name and described. Reasonable evidence of validity and reliability was included. | The purpose, questions, and design are mutually supportive and coherent. Attention has been given to eliminating alternative explanations and describing the control variables. Appropriate and important limitations and assumptions have been clearly stated. Variable definitions were included and linked to research question. Operationalization included purpose statements, type and number of items, and type of scores. |
Hypothesis | Hypothesis incomplete, blank, or very little effort or understanding shown, or - hypothesis attempted, but IV and DV are incorrect and/or - hypothesis does not even attempt to use proper format, and/or hypothesis makes no sense. | IV and DV incorrect or very confusing, or wording is confusing. Hypothesis is incomplete. Hypothesis attempts to make a prediction, but it is too vague or does not address research question. | V and DV correctly identified. Hypothesis predicts what will happen in an experiment and addresses the research question and hypothesis makes sense. | V and DV correctly identified. Hypothesis is very logical and based on background info and very clearly addresses the question, and the reasons for the prediction are obvious |
Sample | The context, population, or sample description is absent or incomplete. The sample strategy is not realistic or inappropriate for the research question | The description of the context, population, or sample strategy is confusing but present. | The context population and sampling strategy was adequately identified and described | The description of the context and population was meaningful, included both quantitative and qualitative description. The sample description/proposal is reasonable to recruit a representative sample of the population. |
Survey | Survey design not described completely and not connected to hypothesis or question | Survey design described but at a very high level. Limited details provided however complete | Survey design description is complete and connected to the hypothesis | Design is complete relevant connected. Student provides insight on expected results and implications |
Analysis | Limited demonstration of application of course concepts. Lack of descriptions on interpretation | Demonstration of some of the basic techniques. Some understanding of concepts and interpretation. | Demonstration of all descriptive measures, and interpretation. Hypothesis test completed and linked to hypothesis question. | Students demonstrate mastery of both descriptive and inferential techniques. The proposal presents all covered concepts with interpretation and data calculations. |
Limitations | Limitations on all aspects of quantitative risks were omitted. | Limitations were briefly mentioned, but not adequately linked to proposed research approach. | Limitations were addressed and discussed | Limitations were fully discussed in terms of proposed research method and appropriately identified which aspects of the process are at risk. |
Timeliness and writing quality | Failure to apply basic rules for manuscript presentation, English composition, and timeliness. No references provided. Delivery was delinquent | Weak, incomplete, ambiguous, or inconsistent application of reference style, manuscript organization, rules of English composition. Limited references provided. Delivery was delinquent | Manuscript conformed to most standards of English composition and selected reference style guidelines. Timeliness of delivery was acceptable. All citations appropriately referenced. | Consistently applied assignment, English composition. All citations were appropriately referenced. |
Learning Reflections | Failure to provide any meaningful reflection on personal learning | Some evidence of personal learning limited discussion of application or importance. | Adequate and thoughtful reflection on learning and description of potential application to HR practice | Extensive reflection on learning, application opportunities discussed, identification of additional areas of growth for quantitative methods and decision making. |
