Apply Rubrics

Code of Ethics Design Paper

1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%	2 Less Than Satisfactory 76.00%	3 Satisfactory 81.00%	4 Good 89.00%	5 Excellent 100.00%
70.0 %Content
10.0 %Overview of Ethics Policies	The general overview of organizational ethics policies is not present	The general overview of ethics policies is present, but incomplete or inaccurate. Supportive research is not present or is inappropriate.	The general overview of ethics policies is complete, but cursory. It is supported by little or antiquated scholarly research.	The general overview of ethics policies is complete and thorough. It is supported by sufficient scholarly research, some of which is outdated.	The general overview of ethics policies is thorough, detailed, and insightful. It is supported by sufficient current scholarly research.
10.0 %Rationale for Code of Ethics Design	The rationale for the code of ethics design is not present.	The rationale for the code of ethics design is present, but incomplete or seriously flawed. Supportive research is not present or is inappropriate.	The rationale for the code of ethics design is complete, but may be somewhat flawed. It is supported by little or antiquated scholarly research.	The rationale for the code of ethics design is thorough and well reasoned. It is supported by sufficient scholarly research, some of which is outdated.	The rationale for the code of ethics design is thorough, detailed, and insightful. It is supported by sufficient, current scholarly research.
35.0 %Code of Ethics	The code of ethics is not present.	The code of ethics is incomplete/unfinished or content is unacceptable (an unacceptable document).	The code of ethics is an acceptable document, although content is cursory.	The code of ethics is a comprehensive document.	The code of ethics is a comprehensive, detailed document.
15.0 %Discussion	Discussion regarding why the plan will succeed is not present.	Discussion regarding why the plan will succeed is incomplete, flawed, or lacking research support.	Discussion regarding why the plan will succeed is presented and complete. The reasoning may be somewhat flawed. It is supported by little or antiquated scholarly research.	Discussion regarding why the plan will succeed is thorough and well reasoned. It is supported by sufficient scholarly research, some of which is outdated.	Discussion regarding why the plan will succeed is thorough, detailed, and insightful. It is supported by sufficient current scholarly research.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.	Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (Includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use.)	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.	Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.	Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.	Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 %Format
5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment.)	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
5.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style.)	No reference page is included. No citations are used.	Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.	Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.	Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.	In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage