RESEARCH EVALUATION FORM
Title of thesis:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section _______________________Group Number: _______________________ Date: __________________________________
I. CRITERIA FOR WRITTEN RESEARCH
Undeveloped 5 Developing
Criteria
5 points 10 points
The researchers failed to answer
Research Question adequately the research question as
well as any of the propositions.
The researchers did not adequately
meet the proposed objectives and/or
failed to explain variances.
Evidence/body of knowledge
Supporting Evidence inadequately discussed
and Body of
Knowledge Evidential support for an argument, or
use of evidence is selective or
inadequate
Researchers deviated from the
Methodology approved methodology/approach
without sufficient justification.
The researchers did not provide an
adequate description of the actual
methods and/or data analysis tools
used.
Satisfactory Outstanding
Score Comments
15 points 20 points
The researchers sufficiently answered
the research question as well as the
propositions.
The researchers sufficiently met
the proposal objectives, explaining
any deviations.
Historical context, assumptions/
biases, and/or ethical considerations
are present/developed.
Body of knowledge thoroughly
discussed
Evidence is sufficient and well
utilized
Researchers adhered to the approved
methodology/approach. When there
were variances, these were properly
justified.
The researchers sufficiently provided
a detailed description of the actual
methods and data analysis tools used.
 Undeveloped Developing
Criteria
5 points 10 points
Gathered only superficial
Data Gathering, information. Fact versus opinion is
Discussion of not well distinguished
Findings, Analysis Perspectives are limited and/or
symbolic tools were used
inappropriately Evaluation, analysis,
and synthesis are limited
Conclusions, implications, and/or
Conclusions, consequences lacking, or
Implications conclusions are loosely related to
consequences or implications
The significance of what was
discovered or learned is unclear
Appropriate connections to
local, national, global, or civic
issues are lacking or weak
Language obscures meaning/is
Writing unclear in places
Grammatical, spelling, or punctuation
errors are distracting or repeated
The writing style is incoherent
Pages lack white space; paragraphs
are too long and do not flow
Work is unfocused
The organization is clumsy or
mechanical
Sources not cited or not used
correctly
Satisfactory Outstanding
Score Comments
15 points 20 points
The data gathered was comprehensive
and exhaustive
Accuracy and relevance of evidence
appropriately questioned
Multiple perspectives considered
Appropriate and/or symbolic tools are
utilized
Evaluation, analysis, and synthesis were
extensive
Conclusions, qualifications, and
consequences including the value of
the thesis are presented and well
developed.
The significance of what was
discovered or learned is clear.
Develops insightful connections to
local, national, global, or civic issues
are discussed.
Language clearly and effectively
communicates ideas
Shows near flawless editing for
grammar, syntax, punctuation,
spelling
The writing style is eloquent/engaging
Pages have white spaces, paragraphs
of adequate length, and is flowing
Work is focused
The organization is clear and effective
Sources and citations used correctly
TOTAL
 II. RUBRIC FOR ORAL PRESENTATION
Criteria Undeveloped Developing Satisfactory Outstanding Score Comments
Organization 0-5 points 6-10 points 11-15 points 16-20 points
Speaker/s Speaker/s adequately Presentation follows a Speaker/s highly organized,
disorganized; organized logical sequence easy to follow, smooth
jumped topics transitions
Delivery 0-5 points The 6-10 points Some 11-15 points 16-20 points
presentation was read or parts of the In most instances, Speech was smooth, clear
seemed memorized presentation was the presentation and
fast/too slow/too soft. No delivered well, other went smoothly. articulate. There was voice
eye-contact. Delivery stiff parts were not. There was minor projection and the pacing
and unsure Attempts were made snags in delivery. were
to adjust the pace of effective. There was eye
delivery. contact.
Delivery was poised.
Content 0-5 points Presentation 6-10 points Content 11-15 points 16-20 points
was not was Presentation was A general audience could
apt to topic nor adequate. There sufficient. In most understand the presentation.
audience. Background were attempts to instances, the Key terms were defined and
information and/or provide background content was Background information
assumptions were information appropriate. provided.
lacking.
Media and 0-5 points Media and 6-10 points There 11-15 points 16-20 points
Resources format were many Satisfactory media Excellent media
were poor choices for media glitches. presentation. There format for content.
content. Materials Some slides were were however some All materials were
were confusing or very distracting. Not lapses. clear and information was
distracting. all speaker/s were in pertinent.
Speaker/s is not in business attire.
business attire.
0-5 points 6-10 points Some 11-15 points 16-20 points
Response to Misunderstands questions were Group was able to answer Group was able to answer
Questions questions; cannot answer misunderstood and most of the questions well. questions well and with
convincingly. There was a inadequately There were occasions reference to its own work.
lot of fumbling about. addressed. Group though when the group Showed knowledge of the
was easily rattled but was not too confident subject matter.
managed to sail about the subject matter.
through.

Component Total Score FINAL SCORE

Written Thesis
Oral Presentation
GRAND TOTAL

Evaluator: _____________________________________
Name and Signature