TEC ASSESSMENT RUBRICS FOR RESEARCH PROPOSAL (YEAR 3)

This rubric has been designed to help with assessment of student teachers’ ability to successfully make and present a research proposal. There are two rubrics –
one for the oral presentation (A) and the other one for the written proposal (B).

The rubrics will:

 provide student teachers, prior to their presentation, with a clear understanding of the elements of their written research proposal and its presentation
deemed most important to the proposal presentation assessor (lecturer);
 help lecturers assess students’ proposals in a more systematic, objective way;
 provide multiple perspectives on student teachers’ ability to successfully prepare and present their proposals as well as their chosen areas of study;
 encourage conversations among colleagues about improving graduate student learning outcomes and assessment;
 serve as a potential source of program-level data on the accomplishment of the program’s learning outcomes and objectives.

Instructions for scoring:

 The rubric for the oral presentation (A) is to be used during the oral presentation. This rubric will be shared with the student teacher.
 The rubric for the written research proposal (B) should be used to score a student teacher’s research proposal. This scored rubric then should be
returned to the coordinator in a confidential way following the presentation. A copy of the completed rubric will be shared with the student teacher.
 The final score of a research proposal comprises the score for the written proposal (max. 80) plus the score for the oral presentation (max. 20), in total
max. 100.
 Research Proposal presentation assessors and student teachers should review and become familiar with the rubrics prior to the presentations.

1
 Rubric Oral Presentation Research Proposal
Student teachers’ name: _________________________________
Presentation date: _________________________________
Title of Research Proposal: _______________________________
A.
0-1
 Showing little comprehension of the topic
being presented
usuangLaOr
al
 Speech is frequently hesitant; sentences may
be left incomplete.
 Vocabulary is inadequate/ limited.
e ge
 Constant errors showing control of very few
major patterns and frequently causing
communication breakdowns.
Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Content and presentation
0-3
 Over-inclusion of the information/ lack of
information about the research proposal.
 Presentation is not clear
 There is no coherence between the parts in
the presentation
 Visual and other supporting materials have
not been carefully selected for the
presentation.
 Slides are not properly prepared.
Assessors name: _________________________________
Time: _________________________________
Signature: _________________________________
ASSESSMENT RUBRIC FOR ORAL PRESENTATION RESEARCH PROPOSAL (20%)
Score
2-3 4-5
obtained
 Showing moderately good comprehension of  Showing excellent comprehension of the
the topic being presented topic being presented
 Speech is occasionally hesitant with some  Speech is effortless and smooth.
unevenness caused by rephrasing and  Vocabulary is broad, precise, and
searching for words. professional.
 Choice of words sometimes is inaccurate.  Few errors, with no patterns of failure
 Frequent errors causing occasional
misunderstanding.
Score
4-6 7 - 10
obtained
 Sufficient information related to the research  Including necessary information related to
proposal the research proposal and
 Sufficiently clear presentation  Clear presentation of such information
 There is sufficient consistency between the  There is a strong consistency between the
parts in the presentation parts in the presentation
 Visual and other supporting materials have  Visual and other supporting materials have
been sufficiently carefully selected for the been carefully selected and explained during
presentation the presentation.
 Slides are sufficiently properly prepared  Slides are prepared well – not dense with
2
  Mostly reading from the slides
 Time management: inappropriately used
allocated time and left insufficient time for
assessor questions
 Occasionally reading from the slides during information.
the presentation.  Not reading from the slides during the
 Time management: sufficiently used presentation.
allocated time and left sufficient time for  Time management: properly used allocated
assessor questions time to address various important
components of the thesis proposal and allow
enough time for assessor questions

Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Responding to assessors’ questions

0-1
 Responses reveal the student’s insufficient
knowledge of the research area/topic, the
study context, the research design, and the
data collection.
 Unsatisfactorily responding to the assessor
questions, leaving doubts unaddressed.
Assessors feel uncertain if the student can
carry out the research successfully.
2-3
 The answers show that the student has
moderate knowledge of the research
area/subject, the study context, the research
design and the data collection
 Respond moderately satisfactorily to the
assessor's questions. Assessors trust that the
student can successfully complete the
research.
Score
4-5
obtained
 Responses reveal the student’s thorough, in-
depth knowledge of the research area/topic,
study context, research design, and data
collection.
 Tactfully and professionally responding to
the assessor questions, addressing most, if
not all, of the doubts raised by the assessors,
making the assessors confident that the
student can carry out the research
successfully

Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Total score of the Oral Presentation Research Proposal _______/20

3

Student teachers’ name: _______________________________
Assessing date: _______________________________
Title of Research Proposal: ____________________________
B.
0-6
 Errors of grammar or word order so severe
as to make comprehension virtually
impossible
Written Language Use
 Uses a mix of simple and complex
structures with frequent errors with
grammar and punctuation
 Often requiring re-reading for
comprehension of the text
 Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to
make comprehension virtually impossible
 Uses of an adequate range of vocabulary for
the tasks.
 Frequent errors on spelling and word
formation, partially impact communication
Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Rubric Written Research Proposal
Assessors’ name: _________________________________
Time: _________________________________
Signature: _________________________________
ASSESSMENT RUBRIC FOR THE WRITTEN RESEARCH PROPOSAL (80%)
Score
7 - 13 14 - 20
obtained
 Uses a variety of complex structures  Uses a wide range of structures with
 Good control of grammar and punctuation flexibility and accuracy

 Regularly errors, which require some re- Few minor errors (but no interruption with
reading for understanding comprehension)
 Uses structures with high flexibility and  Uses a wide range of structures with high
accuracy flexibility and accuracy
 Uses of a sufficient range of vocabulary to  Rare minor errors (slips only
allow some flexibility and precision, with  Uses of a wide range of vocabulary fluently
awareness of style and collocation. and flexibly to convey precise meanings.
 Regularly errors on spelling and word  Few minor errors in spelling and word
formation formation
 Uses of a wide range of vocabulary and
expressions with a natural and sophisticated
control of lexical features.
4
 Score
0-3 4-6 7 - 10 obtained
 Numerous inconsistencies in the proposal  A few inconsistencies in the proposal  Excellent consistency in the proposal
format/text presentation are evidenced, format/text presentation are evidenced, no format/text presentation, making reading of
making reading of the proposal a “very major impact on the reading of the the proposal smooth and a pleasant
proposal. experience.
Organisation

hard” job.
 Many instances of inaccurate/missing
citations in the text as well as in the
Reference section are evidenced.
 Referencing does not comply with the APA
style at all.
 Appendices such as survey instruments,
interview protocols, and consent forms are
not properly discussed and referred to in
the text.
 Some cases of incorrect / missing quotes in
the text and in the Reference section are not
proven.
 Some references does not comply with the
APA style.
 A number appendices such as survey
instruments, interview protocols, and
consent forms are properly discussed and
referred to in the text.
 Citation in the text as well as in the
Reference section is accurate and fully
complies with the APA style.
 All sources used are properly acknowledged
and documented.
 Appendices such as survey instruments,
interview protocols, and consent forms are
properly discussed and referred to in the text.

Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Score
0-3 4-6 7 - 10
obtained
 The study background and research  The study background and research  The study background and research
problem are not clearly stated/elaborated. problem are partly clearly problem are clearly stated/elaborated.
 
Intr

Purpose of the study is not clearly stated. stated/elaborated. Purpose of the study is clearly stated.
 Research questions1 are not clear, specific,  Purpose of the study is partly clearly stated.  Research questions are clear, specific, and
oduc
tion

and “researchable”.  Research questions are partly clear, “researchable”.

 Significance of the research is not clearly specific, and “researchable”.  Significance of the research is clearly
explained  Significance of the research is partly explained.
clearly explained

1
For a qualitative research design, research objectives and research questions can be placed either in the introduction or literature review.

5
 Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Score
0-3 4-6 7 - 10
obtained
 The review of relevant literature is partly  The review of relevant literature is present  The review of relevant literature is present
Review of the Literature

present but vague and ambiguous
 A research problem of the study, and a
research framework is not clearly
studied/presented.
 Relevant literature is not connected to the
research
 Research questions2 are not clearly formed
in order to address issues identified in the
review of the literature.
 Literature has not been processed in the
proposal.
 A research problem of the study, and a
research framework is partly clearly
studied/presented.
 Relevant literature is partly connected to
the research
 Research questions are partly clearly
formed in order to address issues identified
in the review of the literature.
 Literature has been processed partly.
and connected to reliable research literature
 A clear problematization of the research
study is evidenced, and a clear research
framework is provided.
 Relevant literature is connected to the
research
 Research questions are clearly formed in
order to address issues identified in the
review of the literature
 Literature studied has been processed
effectively.

Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Score
0-3 4-6 7 - 10
obtained

2
For a qualitative research design, research objectives and research questions can be placed either in the introduction or literature review.

6
  The research design is confusing or
incomplete given the research questions
Research Methodology and sampling strategy.
 Lack of rigor in the study and research
methodology is evidenced in:
 lack of justification and discussion of
selected methods, and their strengths and
limitations
 lack of clear explanation of the data
collection process and instruments used to
collect data
 lack of ethical consideration, and
 lack of clear data analysis framework(s).
Comments/ Notes: .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Timeframe and feasibility
0-3
of the research plan
 No time frame(s) and/or research plan is
provided.
 The timeframe(s) (if present) not
correspond to the amount of work to be
done to complete the research as suggested
in the proposal timeframes.
 The timeframe and/or research plan (if
present) is not practical, feasible, and
efficient
Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
0-3
 The research design has been identified and
described in detailled terms.
 Rigor in the study and research
methodology is evidenced in:
 partial justification and discussion of
selected methods, and their strengths and
limitations
 partial clear explanation of the data
collection process and instruments used to
collect data
 partial ethical consideration, and
 partial clear data analysis framework(s).
4-6
 A time frame(s) and/or research plan is
provided
 The time frame(s) correspond partly to the
amount of work to be done to complete the
research as suggested in the proposal
timeframes.
 The timeframe and/or research plan is
partly practical, feasible, and efficient
4-6
 The research design, the purpose,
questions, and design are mutually
supportive and coherent.
 Rigor and sound research methodology of
the study is evidenced in:
 justification and discussion of selected
methods, and their strengths and limitations
 clear explanation of the data collection
process and instruments used to collect data
 ethical consideration, and
 clear data analysis framework(s).
Score
7 - 10
obtained
 A time frame(s) and/or research plan is
provided,
 The timeframe(s) reasonably correspond
to the amount of work to be done to
complete the research as suggested in the
proposal timeframes.
 The timeframe and/or research plan is
practical, feasible, and efficient
Score
7 - 10
obtained
7
   

Research instuments and appendices

No appendices are added
 No research instruments are added.
 No other forms such as Expression of
Interest, Consent form, and Letter to the
Head of DERL3 are appended.
Some but not all appendices are added.
 Some but not all research instruments are
added
 Some but not all other forms such as
Expression of Interest, Consent form, and
Letter to the Head of DERL are appended.,
 Some forms are incomplete / unsubtantial
and require a major revision.
All appendices are added.
 All research intruments are added.
 All forms such as Expression of Interest,
Consent form, and Letter to the Head of
DERL are appended, and are ready/almost
ready to use.
 Some forms need only a minor revision, if
any, is needed to make the instruments /
forms ready.

Comments/ Notes: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Total score awarded for the written Research Proposal _____/80

Total Score Awarded for the Research Proposal Oral Presentation Research proposal: ___________/20
Written Research proposal: ___________/80

Final Score for the Research proposal: ___________/100

Please use the grading system4 below as a guide to score the Final Score for the Research Proposal.

Mark obtained Grade Grade Point Meaning

3
DERL, Department of Education Research and Library
4
Accreditation Committee of Cambodia. (2004). Decision On Credit System and Credit Transfers for Higher Educations, No. 04/04 ACC.SSR.
8
85 - 100 A 4.00 Excellent
80 - 84 B+ 3.50 Very Good
70 - 79 B 3.00 Good
65 - 69 C+ 2.50 Fairly Good
50 - 64 C 2.00 Fair
45 - 49 D 1.50 Poor
40 - 44 E 1.00 Very Poor
< 40 F 0.00 Failure