Rubric
Kertas Ilmiah EPPM3093
Nama:
Criteria
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
Background/ problem statement
Research Objectives
Research Implication
Organization of study
LITERATURE REVIEW
1 2
No abstract
This section is severely
underdeveloped and does not
convincingly introduce and analyse
the problem.
No research objectives are included in
the proposal.
No research implications are included
in the proposal.
No organization of study is included
in the proposal.
The literature review lacks
comprehensive coverage of relevant
material. There is no connection
between the material reviewed and
the purpose of the study.
The abstract is stated in the study,
but more than one (1) items are
missing
1. Issue/ The problem statement
3. Research Objective
4. Methodology (Data and
analysis technique?
5. The main findings
6. The significance practical
implication/s
This section is a little vague and
merely introduces the context and
background of the problem.
Some research objectives are
included in the proposal, but they
are unconnected to the material
reviewed in the introduction.
Some research implications are
included in the proposal, but they
are unconnected to the material
reviewed in the introduction.
The organization of study is not
complete and not parallel to that
mentioned in the study
The literature review is relatively
comprehensive and describes
some relevant material. There is
some attempt to connect the
material reviewed with the
purpose of the study.
3 4
The abstract is stated in the study
but one (1) is missing
1. Issue/ The problem statement
3. Research Objective
4. Methodology (Data and analysis
technique?
5. The main findings
6. The significance practical
implication/s
This section could use more
development in establishing the
problem. More evidence of the
problem would help make this
section stronger.
Research objectives are included in
the proposal, and their connection
to the material reviewed in the
introduction is good.
Research implications are included
in the proposal, and their
connection to the material reviewed
in the introduction is good.
The literature review is relatively
comprehensive and describes most
relevant material, although
significant gaps still exist. There is
a good attempt to connect the
material reviewed with the purpose
The abstract comprises all of
these items:
1. Issue/ The problem statement
3. Research Objective
4. Methodology (Data and
analysis technique?
5. The main findings
6. The significance practical
implication/s
This section provides the
necessary background or context
for the problem or need. It
conveys specific
place/organization of which the
problem below relates.
Specific research objectives are
included in the proposal, and they
are directly connected to the
material reviewed in the
introduction.
Specific research implications are
included in the proposal, and they
are directly connected to the
material reviewed in the
introduction.
The organization of study is
complete
The literature review is very
comprehensive and describes
relevant material. There is an
excellent connection between the
material reviewed and the
purpose of the study.

Hypotheses
Theoretical Framework
Intervention (a new knowledge in
the proposed study) – THIS IS
OPTIONAL BUT IF YOUR
PROPOSAL CAN PROVIDE
THIS MATERIAL THEN IT
WILL BE A BONUS
METHODS
FINDINGS AND
DISCUSSIONS
CONCLUSION
No hypotheses
Fails to establish an appropriate
theoretical framework for the
proposed model
There are no innovative elements in
the proposed intervention.
No methods section is included in the
proposal or many key elements of the
methods are absent e.g.,
participants/data described,
conditions, comprehensive list of
material provided, procedure clearly
described, method(s) of analysis
discussed)
No or little results shown. Very little
analysis of results, with even a
superficial analysis missing.
Little discussions
No conclusion is provided
Some hypotheses are included in
the proposal, but they are
unconnected to objectives of
study
Establishes a basic theoretical
framework for the proposed
model.
There are only a small number of
innovative elements in the
proposed intervention.
A methods section is present, but
numerous elements of the
methods are absent or described
insufficiently e.g.,
participants/data described,
conditions, comprehensive list of
material provided, procedure
clearly described, method(s) of
analysis discussed)
Results are analysed superficially
with only raw numbers being
dictated rather than potential
causes for those results.
Major components missing in the
discussion.
Little attempt to tie together
experiments and problem
statement/claims.
The conclusion is stated in the
study, but more than one (1) items
are missing
1. reopen the issue.
2. restate the RO.
3. Explain the main research
of the study.
The hypotheses are included in the
proposal, and their connection to
the objectives of study is good.
Establishes a sound and proficient
theoretical framework for the
proposed model.
There are a number of innovative
elements in the proposed
intervention.
A methods section is present, and
only a few elements of the methods
are absent or described
insufficiently e.g., participants/data
described, conditions,
comprehensive list of material
provided, procedure clearly
described, method(s) of analysis
discussed)
Thorough analysis of results but
some glaring questions unanswered.
Results for claims or problem
statement not fully satisfactory.
Some discussions are drawn but
missing some points in terms of
linkage of results to problem
statement.
The conclusion is stated in the study
but one (1) is missing
1. reopen the issue.
2. restate the RO.
3. Explain the main research results
that answer the objective
The hypotheses are included in
the proposal, and they are directly
connected to the objectives of
study.
Establishes an advanced
theoretical framework) for the
proposed model.
The proposed intervention is
extremely innovative.
A methods section is present, it is
written clearly, and the section is
missing none of the key elements
of the methods e.g.,
participants/data described,
conditions, comprehensive list of
material provided, procedure
clearly described, method(s) of
analysis discussed)
are drawn.
Thorough analysis of results,
presenting not just raw evaluation
data but conclusions that can be
drawn from them.
Strong links made between
problem statement, claims made,
and results.
Discussion ties the problem
statement, experiments, and
results well to tell an overall
story.
The conclusion is completely
stated accordingly:
1. reopen the issue.
2. restate the RO.
3. Explain the main research
results that answer the objective

OVERALL The proposal either gives a slight nod
to a rebuttal or offers none at all.
CITATION & REFERENCE Major problems exist with references.
Many citations in the body of the
proposal are missing. Reference list is
either absent or seriously problematic.
GRAMMAR/FORMAT Writing poorly observes the
grammatical conventions of standard
written English/ BM.
Gaya UKM/ any format requested by
the supervisor is not followed.
ORGANIZATION The proposal is very disorganized.
The writing does not flow logically
either across sections or within
sections.
Total: / 60 X 100 =
results that answer the objective
4. Specific theoretical and
practical implications
5. Limitations of the study and
suggestion for future research
The proposal merely introduces
an alternative but does not
adequately address why it’s not
the best option.
An attempt has been made to deal
with references in the proposal.
Some citations are missing in the
body of the proposal. Some
references are missing in the
reference list or the reference list
is slightly problematic.
Writing has several mechanical
errors and readability problems.
Gaya UKM/ any format requested
by the supervisor is followed, but
incomplete.
The proposal is somewhat
disorganized. The writing does
not flow logically either across
sections or within sections.
4. Specific theoretical and practical
implications
5. Limitations of the study and
suggestion for future research
The proposal introduces an
alternative or counterargument, but
could use more development in
explaining why it’s not the best
option or why it will indeed work.
A good attempt has been made to
deal with references in the proposal.
There are very few problems with
the citations in the body of the
proposal. There are very few
problems with the reference list
Writing generally observes the
grammatical conventions of
standard written English/ BM.
Proposal has a few distracting
mechanical errors.
Gaya UKM/ any format requested
by the supervisor is good.
The proposal is relatively
organized. The writing flows
relatively well across sections and
within sections
4. Specific theoretical and
practical implications
5. Limitations of the study and
suggestion for future research
The proposal addresses a
thoughtful alternative or
counterargument to the proposal.
It could discuss other.
Referencing is excellent. There
are no issues with citations in the
body of the proposal. There are
no issues with the reference list.
Writing observes the grammatical
conventions of standard written
English/ BM and exhibits
sophistication in effective
sentence variety. Proposal is free
from distracting mechanical
errors (grammar, spelling, and
punctuation). One or two minor
typos exist but are not overly
distracting.
Gaya UKM/ any format requested
by the supervisor is excellent.
The organization of the proposal
is excellent. The flow of the
writing is excellent across
sections and within sections.