Rubric

Find Rubric
Keep in mind that 47 students have already been assessed using this rubric. Changing it will affect their evaluations.
Bibliography Rubric
Bibliography Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
Item 1
threshold: pts
20.0 pts
The item is an excellent source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear, specific, and informative. The item's data fields are comprehensive and correct. The item is tagged correctly.
19.0 pts
The item is a good source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear and informative. The item's data fields are correct. The item is tagged correctly with the student's initials.
17.0 pts
The item is good but its scholarly provenance may be less obvious. The annotation is effective, but may lack clarity or specificity. Item's fields are mostly complete but may contain errors -- errors in the URL, for example. The item is correctly tagged with the student's initials.
14.0 pts
The item is of acceptable merit, but there may be some ambiguity about its scholarly provenance. The annotation is adequate, but may lack clarity or specificity or it may contain errors. Item fields are mostly correct but some may be missing or incomplete. The author's tag may be missing.
12.0 pts
The item is of marginal value, and its scholarly value may be in doubt. The annotation may be lacking in value or clarity. Some fields may be incorrect, missing, or in the wrong places. The author's tag may be missing.
0.0 pts
No Marks
pts
20.0 pts
--
Item 2
threshold: pts
20.0 pts
The item is an excellent source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear, specific, and informative. The item's data fields are comprehensive and correct. The item is tagged correctly.
19.0 pts
The item is a good source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear and informative. The item's data fields are correct. The item is tagged correctly with the student's initials.
17.0 pts
The item is good but its scholarly provenance may be less obvious. The annotation is effective, but may lack clarity or specificity. Item's fields are mostly complete but may contain errors -- errors in the URL, for example. The item is correctly tagged with the student's initials.
14.0 pts
The item is of acceptable merit, but there may be some ambiguity about its scholarly provenance. The annotation is adequate, but may lack clarity or specificity or it may contain errors. Item fields are mostly correct but some may be missing or incomplete. The author's tag may be missing.
12.0 pts
The item is of marginal value, and its scholarly value may be in doubt. The annotation may be lacking in value or clarity. Some fields may be incorrect, missing, or in the wrong places. The author's tag may be missing.
0.0 pts
No Marks
pts
20.0 pts
--
Item 3
threshold: pts
20.0 pts
The item is an excellent source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear, specific, and informative. The item's data fields are comprehensive and correct. The item is tagged correctly.
19.0 pts
The item is a good source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear and informative. The item's data fields are correct. The item is tagged correctly with the student's initials.
17.0 pts
The item is good but its scholarly provenance may be less obvious. The annotation is effective, but may lack clarity or specificity. Item's fields are mostly complete but may contain errors -- errors in the URL, for example. The item is correctly tagged with the student's initials.
14.0 pts
The item is of acceptable merit, but there may be some ambiguity about its scholarly provenance. The annotation is adequate, but may lack clarity or specificity or it may contain errors. Item fields are mostly correct but some may be missing or incomplete. The author's tag may be missing.
12.0 pts
The item is of marginal value, and its scholarly value may be in doubt. The annotation may be lacking in value or clarity. Some fields may be incorrect, missing, or in the wrong places. The author's tag may be missing.
0.0 pts
No Marks
pts
20.0 pts
--
Item 4
threshold: pts
20.0 pts
The item is an excellent source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear, specific, and informative. The item's data fields are comprehensive and correct. The item is tagged correctly.
19.0 pts
The item is a good source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear and informative. The item's data fields are correct. The item is tagged correctly with the student's initials.
17.0 pts
The item is good but its scholarly provenance may be less obvious. The annotation is effective, but may lack clarity or specificity. Item's fields are mostly complete but may contain errors -- errors in the URL, for example. The item is correctly tagged with the student's initials.
14.0 pts
The item is of acceptable merit, but there may be some ambiguity about its scholarly provenance. The annotation is adequate, but may lack clarity or specificity or it may contain errors. Item fields are mostly correct but some may be missing or incomplete. The author's tag may be missing.
12.0 pts
The item is of marginal value, and its scholarly value may be in doubt. The annotation may be lacking in value or clarity. Some fields may be incorrect, missing, or in the wrong places. The author's tag may be missing.
0.0 pts
No Marks
pts
20.0 pts
--
Item 5
threshold: pts
20.0 pts
The item is an excellent source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear, specific, and informative. The item's data fields are comprehensive and correct. The item is tagged correctly.
19.0 pts
The item is a good source of high scholarly value. The annotation is clear and informative. The item's data fields are correct. The item is tagged correctly with the student's initials.
17.0 pts
The item is good but its scholarly provenance may be less obvious. The annotation is effective, but may lack clarity or specificity. Item's fields are mostly complete but may contain errors -- errors in the URL, for example. The item is correctly tagged with the student's initials.
14.0 pts
The item is of acceptable merit, but there may be some ambiguity about its scholarly provenance. The annotation is adequate, but may lack clarity or specificity or it may contain errors. Item fields are mostly correct but some may be missing or incomplete. The author's tag may be missing.
12.0 pts
The item is of marginal value, and its scholarly value may be in doubt. The annotation may be lacking in value or clarity. Some fields may be incorrect, missing, or in the wrong places. The author's tag may be missing.
0.0 pts
No Marks
pts
20.0 pts
--
Total Points: 100.0 out of 100.0