Utrecht University – Medicine

ASSESSMENT
Rubric Writing Assignment /Report, Research Internship Transition Year
Daily supervisor
Criteria Below expected level On the expected level Above expected level1
Grade Insufficient Sufficient Good Very good Excellent (top 10%)
Indication 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Content
Title • Covers the content insufficient • Covers the content • It appeals and is original/creative
Abstract • Incorrect/insufficient display of content • Correct display of content • It appeals and is concise
• Misses key points of the main text • Contains the highlights and conclusion from the main text • Makes the reader curious
• Misses the question of the assignment • Clear question of the assignment
Introduction • Limited selection of relevant literature • Correct and concise overview of relevant literature • The research question adds a substantial new perspective
and question • Research question misses focus • Research question is embedded in literature or insight to the field
• Relevance of research question is unclear • Research question is described clearly
• Relevance of research question is clear
Body text • Incomplete/incorrect display of literature • Research question is leading for analyse • The research question is answered more than enough from
• Methods are described unclear • Methods are well chosen and described different perspectives
• Incoherent or to less substantiation of argumentation • Results are written down clearly • The research results are combined and have enough
• Text contains a lot of repeating elements • Argumentation is logic and substantiated content
• List with abbreviations is present
Conclusion • Less support of the conclusion • Conclusions are adequate and substantiated • Conclusions are correct, clear, and substantiated with
• Does not answer to the research question enough • It answers the research question strong arguments
Discussion • Reflection on the results is absent • Reflects adequate on results of the study • Contains strong argumentation
• Insufficient reflexion on the results • Places the results in context of the literature • Contributes to new insights in the field by combining
• Recognition of the limits of the study information
• Has concrete suggestions for future research and contains
new research questions
Tabels and • Lacking or are not sufficient with the text • Appropriate with the text • Clear and complete displaying
figures • Lacking or incorrect reference • Correct reference to figures from the text • The student made himself, non-existing, supportive figures
• Lacking or incorrect legend • Correct content and extent of legend
• Results or numbers are incorrect or inconsistent • Results or numbers are correct and consistent
Structure & • Theme is missing • Contains a clear theme • Rich vocabulary, variation in terminology
shape • No scientific style • Scientific style • Fascinating writing style
(applies for • Repeating information • Logical structure and layout in paragraphs with titles
• Lot of misspellings • Less misspellings and the grammar is correct
the whole
• Lack of logical structure
content)
References • No references, insufficient references, or to one-sided • References are present, sufficient, and correct • Important references are correctly integrated
• Uses one reference method • Important references are correctly combined with own
• Uses correct references to support the corresponding points diagnostic findings and this leads to depth

Professional attitude
Critical • Is not questioning his/her own findings • Ask question due to own findings • Has a critical look to the published results
attitude • Mixes up facts and opinions • Can separate facts and opinions

Rating (0-10)2:
nd nd
Signature 2 supervisor: Name 2 supervisor:
Name student: Round off to 1 decimal
Date: Student number:
1
Concerns the criteria ‘on the expected level’ with on top of that ‘above expected level’.
2
The final mark is the average of al individual elements