Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Total points

Informal Activity - Systematic Data Collection

Participant completes the activity and writes an appropriate reflection of the experience; has fun with the activity!

Participant does not complete appropriately or on time.

________/10

Participant answers all questions on the test on a given attempt with 100% accuracy. Participant can take the test as often as s/he wishes up to the due date listed in the syllabus. (Every question must be answered correctly during any one attempt. If one or more questions are answered incorrectly on an attempt, that entire attempt is discounted.) No partial credit will be given for this requirement.

Note: The test is divided into four sections. Each participant must attain a score of 100% on each section as described above.

Research Design Activities

Participant responses appropriately address all of the research design concepts and principles in the respective RDA. If the participant receives an initial grade of “not satisfactory”, the participant revises the RDA according to the feedback given by the instructor and submits the revision to the instructor by the appropriate due date.

(RDA 1) X 10 points

(RDA 2) X 10 points

(RDA 3) X 10 points

Participant chooses not to submit an RDA, or, if the initial evaluation is rated as “not satisfactory”, chooses not to revise and resubmit the RDA to the instructor by the appropriate due date.

________/30

Buddy Feedback on Research Design Activities

Participant provides thoughtful feedback to all aspects of his/her design buddy’s first draft of the respective RDA by the appropriate due date.

(RDA 1) X 1.67 points

(RDA 2) X 1.67 points

(RDA 3) X 1.67 points

Participant chooses not to provide feedback to his/her design buddy’s respective RDA, or fails to do so by the appropriate due date.

________/5

Watch at least 5 presentations of other classmates' research design projects and writes a brief critique (100 words each) addressing the following points: 1) 1-sentence summary of the topic; 2) importance of the topic; 3) strengths and weaknesses of the project; and 4) persuasiveness of the presentation.

Research Design Project

Each participant is required to submit a research design project individually or in pairs. The purpose of this project is to apply research to study, solve, or improve an educational problem.

It is acceptable (and encouraged) that participants complete their respective RDAs with their individual project in mind.

There are two elements to the research design project:

• A 2-page executive summary (1 inch margins, 12-point font, single-spaced within paragraphs, double-spaced between paragraphs;
• Pre-recorded presentation lasting absolutely no longer than 10 minutes.

Total _____/100 X 40% = Research Design Project Grade

Note: This score could be reduced based on your team members' critique of your individual performance on the team.

Excellent

Average

Unsatisfactory

The Introduction addresses the following subheadings in a clear and organized way:

1. General background for the study or the development;
2. Purpose of the study or the development;
3. Clearly written research questions or statement of the need for development;
4. Significance of the study or the development

(21-25)

Same as "excellent,"but containing minor errors or inconsistencies.

(16-20)

Not all subheadings are included or appropriately written.

The introduction is poorly constructed or does not address each of the subheadings.

The stated problem and review of literature do not match.

The stated problem and the research methods or design specifications do not match.

(0-15)

The Review of Literature is clearly based on an outline generated by the introduction.

There is evidence that each study cited has been read and reviewed critically according to criteria discussed by Leedy and Ormrod. (Due to space limitations, details of at least one study are presented.)

The review is strong in synthesis and integration: General principles are clearly drawn from the separate studies reviewed.

At least 10 references from peer-reviewed scholarly journals. At least 8 of the references are research articles reporting primary data, at least 1 reference is of a review of research discussing secondary data, and at least 1 reference is theoretical in purpose.

All references are clearly focused on and related to the stated problem.

(21-25)

The stated problem and review of literature are not as consistent as they should be.

There is a tendency to present the literature without sufficient attention to synthesis and integration.

Not all articles are clearly from peer-reviewed scholarly journals.

(16-20)

The stated problem and review of literature do not match.

Too few references or references of poor quality or lacking focus on the stated problem.

Some of the references are clearly not from peer-reviewed scholarly journals (magazines, newspapers, podcasts, etc.)

(0-15)

Research Methods
or
Design Specifications

(Participants can either propose a research project or a development project. For a research project describe the Research Methods of the study you propose. For a development project, describe the Design Specifications of the artifact, curriculum, etc. you intend to build.)

The research methods or design specifications describe precisely what you are you going to do.

The research methods or design specifications clearly address the stated problem.

The research methods or design specifications show creativity and thoughtfulness without violating any methodological or design rules.

The research methods or design specifications are achievable.

Same as "excellent,"but containing minor errors or inconsistencies.

The research methods or design specifications do not address the problem.

The research methods or design specifications are sloppy with little attention to a thoughtful attempt to study, solve, or improve the state problem.

The proposal is very persuasive. The case is made, based in large part on the review of literature, that the proposed or development needs to be done as soon as possible.

(5)

The proposal is not persuasive at all. The case is made more on personal opinion rather than on evidence resulting from a review of the literature.

(0)

Writing Quality of the 2-Page Executive Summary

Report is written in a standard narrative style, that is, with complete sentences and complete paragraphs throughout. Writing is clear, concise, and precise. Each section of the report includes an appropriate introduction and conclusion. Each section flows well (consistency and continuity). Report is written in Microsoft Word with a length of no more than 2 pages, excluding the reference list, using 1 inch margins, 12-point font, single-spaced within paragraphs, and double-spaced between paragraphs. Citations within the narrative and the reference list are constructed using APA format.

(21-25)

Report is written in a standard narrative style, that is, with complete sentences and complete paragraphs throughout. Writing is generally clear, concise, and precise with only occasional vagueness.

(16-20)

Writing style is poor and does not use a standard narrative style. Writing is fragmented. Writing style is over-dependent on bulleted lists. Report is either excessively short or excessively long.

(0-15)

________/25

Style: Balancing credibility and interest

The presentation is well rehearsed. There is evidence of substance or credibility. The presentation is captivating and not boring.

(9-10)

The presentation is well rehearsed, but some rough spots. There is evidence of substance or credibility, but the presentation is not as captivating or interesting as it could be.

(6-8)

The presentation shows a lack of rehearsal or preparedness. The presenter/s fail to appear to be credible, or conversely, focus only on facts or data and fail to captivate audience (i.e. audience can't wait for presentation to end).

(0-5)

________/10

Time Limit

The presentation does not go beyond 10 minutes.

(5)

The presentation goes over 10 minutes.

(0-4, depending on the scope of the time limit violation.)

________/5