Department of Criminal Justice
Rubric for the Assessment of Internship Papers

Student Name: ______

A. Front Matter / Unacceptable (0 points) / Minimally Acceptable,
But Needs Improvement (1/2 point) / Meets or Exceeds Expectations (1 point)
Title Page
Score: _____ / Title page is missing or, if present, is not formatted in any way that resembles the requirements. / The title page is generally formatted in accordance with the requirements, but one or more of the required elements are missing or are incorrectly formatted. / The title page is formatted in full accordance with the requirements.
Abstract
Score: _____ / A properly formatted abstract is missing. / An abstract is presented, but it either is not the correct format or it does not adequately summarize the paper. / A single-paragraph abstract of 120 words or less summarizes the paper.
Introduction
Score: _____ / Specific problem/concept to be studied is unclear or undefined. / Specific problem/concept to be studied lacks a proper context. / Problem/concept is specifically identified and defined in its proper context.
B. Substance of Paper / Unacceptable
(1 point) / Minimally Acceptable,
But Needs Improvement (2 points) / Meets or Exceeds Expectations (3 points)
Lit. Review
Score: _____ / The relevant literature is missing or lacks application. The theoretical focus is missing or lacks application. / Some of the relevant literature is improperly applied and/or integrated. The theoretical focus is inadequate and/or improperly integrated. / The relevant literature is included, properly applied/well-integrated. The theoretical focus is clear and well-documented.
Methodology
Score: _____ / The methodological framework is missing or fails to describe participant-observation adequately. / There are some problems in explaining and applying the participant-observation methods in a scientifically sound manner. / The participant-observation method is explained and applied in a scientifically sound manner.
Discussion of
Principle Findings
Score: _____ / Discussion is boring, illogical, and/or fails to demonstrate basic comprehension of sources and data. Discussion lacks clear, central ideas or is too vague or obvious to be developed effectively. Fails to compare and contrast majors themes identified in the literature review with systematically-gathered participant-observation data. / Discussion is marginally interesting, somewhat logical, and/or shows basic comprehension of sources and data from field notes, perhaps with lapses in understanding. Presents central idea in general terms, sometimes depending on platitudes or clichés. Central ideas are weakly communicated or not fully developed. Superficially compares and contrasts majors themes identified in the literature review with systematically-gathered participant-observation data. / Discussion is interesting, logical, and demonstrates sophistication of thought. Central ideas are clearly communicated and fully developed. Meaningfully compares and contrasts majors themes identified in the literature review with systematically-gathered participant-observation data.
Conclusion
Score: _____ / Conclusion is missing or weak. Little or no evidence that the internship experience and the relevant literature was reflected upon in a meaningful way. / Conclusion is present, but lack substantial grounding. Evidence that there is a connection between the internship experience and the relevant literature is superficially presented. / Conclusions are clear, concise, and grounded in the research. Evidence of the connection between the internship experience and the relevant literature is clear and substantiated.
C. Technical Merit / Unacceptable
(0 points) / Minimally Acceptable,
But Needs Improvement (1 point) / Meets or Exceeds Expectations (2 points)
Logic/
Organization
Score: _____ / Does not develop ideas cogently, organize them logically within paragraphs, and/or connect them with clear transitions; uneven and/or ineffective overall organization. / Develops and organizes ideas in paragraphs that are not necessarily connected with transitions; some overall organization, but some ideas are may seem illogical and/or unrelated. / Develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically within paragraphs, connects them with highly effective transitions; clear and logically consistent organization relating all ideas together.
Writing Style Mechanics
Score: _____ / Poor control of language, including word choice and sentence structure problems; frequent errors in standard written English. / Intermittent control of language, including word choice and sentence variety; occasional major or frequent minor errors in standard written English. / Clear and effective control of language, including word choice and sentence variety; competence with the conventions of standard written English.
Number of References
Score: _____ / The paper fails to use 15 or more legitimate/professional references or, alternatively, fewer than 6 references are from scholarly sources. / The paper uses 15 or more legitimate/professional references, but only between 7 and 10 of them are from scholarly sources. / The paper uses 15 or more legitimate/professional references, at least 10 of which are from scholarly sources.
Quality of References
Score: _____ / References are seldom cited to support statements. Those references that are cited are outdated and/or are from non-peer-reviewed sources that have uncertain reliability. The reader doubts the accuracy of much of the material presented. / Although attributions are given, some statements seem unsubstantiated. Although most of the references are up-to-date and are professionally legitimate, too many are either outdated or are from are questionable sources (e.g., trade books, the Internet, popular magazines, etc.). The reader is uncertain of the reliability of some of the sources and/or is confused about the source of information and ideas. / Compelling evidence from 10 or more scholarly sources and/or professionally legitimate sources is given to support claims. Attribution is clear and fairly represented. References are up-to-date and are primarily from peer-reviewed scholarly journals, relevant professional journals, and/or other primary sources (e.g., government documents, judicial opinions, agency manuals, legislative sources, etc.). The reader is confident that the information and ideas can be trusted.
Citation Format
Score: _____ / Research is not adequately quoted and/or paraphrased, and/or is cited with frequent APA formatting errors. Alternatively, the format of the document is not recognizable as having been cited in APA format. / Research is adequately quoted and/or paraphrased, and is cited with minor APA citation formatting errors. / Research is correctly quoted and/or paraphrased, and is cited both accurately and consistently throughout the paper in proper APA format.

Total Score: _____ out of 25 Points

Grading Scale:


A = 25.0 – 22.5 B = 22.0 – 20.0 C = 19.5 – 17.5 D = 17.0 – 15.0 F = 14.5 or below