Marking Rubric Assessment One
Research and Evaluation in Health MEDS6013
Unsatisfactory
Introduction 0-4
Inadequate introduction to the
research study under critique.
Summary 0-4
Inadequate summary of the aim,
objectives, methodology, results
and outcomes of the study under
critique.
Research ethics value 1 0-9
Does not adequately distinguish
the ethical issues with respect to
the first value chosen.
Research ethics value 2 0-9
Does not adequately distinguish
the ethical issues with respect to
the second value chosen.
Changes in research ethics 0-4
Does not adequately identify and
describe the international
research ethics practices that
changed as a result of
investigations into this study.
Conclusion 0-4
Satisfactory
5-6
Introduces the research study
under critique.
5-6
Summarises the aim, objectives,
methodology, results and
outcomes of the study under
critique.
10-13
Distinguishes the ethical issues
relevant to the research with
respect to the first value chosen,
but does not discuss these in any
detail
10-13
Distinguishes the ethical issues
relevant to the research with
respect to the second value
chosen, but does not discuss
these in any detail
5-6
Identifies the international
research ethics practices that
changed as a result of
investigations into this study, but
does not discuss these in any
detail.
5-6
Well done
7-8
Introduces the research study
under critique and attempts to
provide some scope for the
submission.
7-8
Summarises the aim, objectives,
methodology, results and
outcomes of the study under
critique, noting areas of ethical,
methodological or other
concerns.
14-17
Distinguishes the ethical issues
specifically relevant to the
research with respect to the first
value chosen and provides a
discussion of these.
14-17
Distinguishes the ethical issues
specifically relevant to the
research with respect to the
second value chosen and
provides a discussion of these.
7-8
Identifies the international
research ethics practices that
changed as a result of
investigations into this study,
and provides a discussion of
these.
7-8
Excellent
9-10 /10
Succinctly introduces the
research study under critique.
Defines the scope of the
submission and signposts the
document.
9-10 /10
Summarises the aim, objectives,
methodology, results and
outcomes of the study under
critique, noting areas of ethical,
methodological or other
concerns, with reference to
relevant literature
18-20 /20
Distinguishes the ethical issues
specifically relevant to the
research with respect to the first
value, and provides an excellent
discussion of these with respect
to the research project overall
18-20 /20
Distinguishes the ethical issues
specifically relevant to the
research with respect to the
second value, and provides an
excellent discussion of these
with respect to the research
project overall
9-10 /10
Identifies the international
research ethics practices that
changed as a result of
investigations into this study,
and provides an excellent
discussion of these.
9-10 /10
Res & Eval in Hlth. 2022
 Conclusion does not adequately
summarise the main points of
the critique. No critique of the
research ethics values are made
nor opinions included.
Organisation and presentation 0-4
Poorly organized. Terminology
inaccurate/imprecise. Needs
more practice in written
presentation of information.
Does not maintain the word limit
(over or under by 10%).
Referencing 0-4
Demonstrates poor referencing
skills or effort and an over-
reliance on tertiary sources.
Silent about or unaware of issues
of source accuracy, reliability,
and authority. Does not use a
reference manager for citation
management. Referencing lacks
consistency of APA 7th style
and/or format.
Total
Conclusion summarises main
points of the critique. No critique
of the research ethics values are
made nor opinions included.
5-6
Fair organization. Maintains the
word limit. Presentation of
information somewhat
disorganised. Terminology
sometimes inaccurate or
imprecise. Presents some
information that is
inconsequential and/or
redundant. Not correctly
formatted in APA style.
5-6
Includes references from a few
relevant secondary information
sources, more than one tertiary
source. Demonstrates limited
research. Displays
inconsistencies about issues of
source accuracy, reliability, and
authority. Some information is
not referenced. Attempts to use
a reference manager for citation
management. Contains several
citation errors.
Conclusion summarises the main
points of the critique. Some
critique of the research ethics
values are made.
7-8
Satisfactory organization.
Maintains the word limit.
Information organized &
pertinent. Use of terminology
generally adequate though at
times imprecise. Little, if any
redundancy. Almost correctly
formatted in APA style.
7-8
Uses appropriate references
from a number of relevant
information sources, that
adequate information access,
evaluation and application.
Notes briefly issues of source
accuracy, reliability, and
authority. Competently uses a
reference manager for citation
management. Cited works
/bibliography follow APA 7th with
few citation errors
Conclusion summarises the main
points of the critique without
repeating previous sentences;
the critique of the research
ethics values is logical and well
thought out.
9-10 /10
Good organization. Maintains
the word limit. Information
presented in a logical, organized
manner. Clear, concise, pertinent
information without redundancy.
Use of terminology accurate &
precise. Correctly formatted in
APA style.
9-10 /10
Uses a variety of sources in
making accurate statements that
demonstrate highly competent
information access, evaluation
and application. Thoroughly
evaluates source accuracy,
reliability, and authority. Skilfully
uses many functions of a
reference manager for citation
management. Uses APA7th
skilfully
/100%
Res & Eval in Hlth. 2022