Engineering Analytical Rubric Question Title * 1. COURSE NUMBER Question Title * 2. SECTION NUMBER Question Title * 3. YEAR/SEMESTER Question Title * 4. FOCUS (4) Exemplary: Excels in responding to assignment. Interesting, demonstrates sophistication of thought. Central idea/thesis is clearly communicated, worth developing; limited enough to be manageable. (3) Accomplished A paper responding appropriately to assignment and most of the key concepts are identified and operationally defined.Contains some irrelevant information but does not detract from focus. Clearly states a thesis/central idea, but may have minor lapses in development. (2) DevelopingAdequate but weaker and less effective, possibly responding less well to assignment. Presents central idea in general terms, often depending on platitudes or cliches. (1) Beginning Does not have a clear central idea or does not respond appropriately to the assignment. Thesis may be too vague or obvious to be developed effectively. (0) UnacceptableDoes not respond to the assignment, lacks a thesis or central idea. Question Title * 5. ORGANIZATION & DEVELOPMENT (4) ExemplaryPaper recognizes some complexity of its thesis: may acknowledge its contradictions, qualifications, or limits and follow out their logical implications. Uses evidence appropriately and effectively, providing sufficient evidence and explanation to convince. Uses a logical structure appropriate to paper's subject, purpose, audience, thesis, and disciplinary field.Sophisticated transitional sentences often develop one idea from the previous one or identify their logical relations. It guides the reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas.Assignment should follow the institute of Industrial Engineering (IIE) journal style, which include abstract, introduction, literature review, research methodology and experiment, design analysis, results discussion, conclusion then references. (3) Accomplished Begins to acknowledge the complexity of central idea and the possibility of other points of view. Begins to offer reasons to support its points, perhaps using varied kinds of evidence. Begins to interpret the evidence and explain connections between evidence and main ideas. Its examples bear some relevance. Shows a logical progression of ideas and uses fairly sophisticated transitional devices; e.g., may move from least to more important idea.Some logical links may be faulty, but each paragraph clearly relates to paper's central idea.Organization of argument is clear in parts or only partially described and mostly implemented. (2) Developing Usually does not acknowledge other views. Often uses generalizations to support its points. May use examples, but they may be obvious or not relevant. Often depends on unsupported opinion or personal experience, or assumes that evidence speaks for itself and needs no application to the point being discussed. Often has lapses in logic. May list ideas or arrange them randomly rather than using any evident logical structure. May use transitions, but they are likely to be sequential (first, second, third) rather than logic-based. While each paragraph may relate to central idea, logic is not always clear. Paragraphs have topic sentences but may be overly general, and arrangement of sentences within paragraphs may lack coherence. (1) BeginningDepends on cliches or overgeneralizations for support, or offers little evidence of any kind. May be personal narrative rather than essay, or summary rather than analysis. May have random organization, lacking internal paragraph coherence and using few or inappropriate transitions. Paragraphs may lack topic sentences or main ideas, or may be too general or too specific to be effective. Paragraphs may not all relate to paper's thesis. (0) UnacceptableUses irrelevant details or lacks supporting evidence entirely. May be unduly brief. Organization of argument is missing, vague, or not consistently maintained. Question Title * 6. STYLE & SENTENCE STRUCTURE (4) ExemplaryPaper is coherently organized and the logic is easy to follow.Chooses words for their precise meaning and uses an appropriate level of specificity. Sentence style fits paper's audience and purpose.Sentences are varied, yet clearly structured and carefully focused, not long and rambling (3) Accomplished Uses relatively vague and general words, may use some inappropriate language. Sentence structure generally correct, but sentences may be wordy, unfocused, repetitive, or confusing. (2) DevelopingMay be too vague and abstract, or very personal and specific. Usually contains several awkward or ungrammatical sentences; sentence structure is simple or monotonous. (1) BeginningMay be too vague and abstract, or very personal and specific. Usually contains several awkward or ungrammatical sentences; sentence structure is simple or monotonous. (0) UnacceptableUsually contains many awkward sentences, misuses words, and employs inappropriate language; lacks transitions and coherence. Question Title * 7. GRAMMAR & MECHANICS (4) ExemplaryThere are no spelling, or punctuation, or grammatical errors and terminology is clearly defined. Writing is clear and concise and persuasive. (3) AccomplishedMay contain only a few minor spelling or grammatical errors, or terms are not clearly defined, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding.Assignment follows the institute of Industrial Engineering (IIE) journal style. (2) DevelopingUsually contains several mechanical errors, which may temporarily confuse the reader but not impede the overall understanding.Assignment follows the institute of Industrial Engineering (IIE) journal style. (1) BeginningUsually contains either many mechanical errors or a few important errors that block the reader's understanding and ability to see connections between thoughts.Assignment follows the institute of Industrial Engineering (IIE) journal style partially. (0) UnacceptableUsually contains so many mechanical errors that it is impossible for the reader to follow the thinking from sentence to sentence.Assignment does not follow the institute of Industrial Engineering (IIE) journal style, and missing multiple sections. Question Title * 8. RESEARCH (4) ExemplaryResearch selected is highly relevant to the argument, is presented accurately and completely – the method, results, and implications are all presented accurately; Theory is relevant, accurately described and all relevant components are included; relationship between research and theory is clearly articulated and accurate.Understands and critically evaluates its sources, appropriately limits and defines terms.Documentation should follow wither APA or MLA style.Uses effective number of sources to support claimsOnly published conference or journal articles are accepted sources. (3) AccomplishedResearch is relevant to the argument and is mostly accurate and complete – there are some unclear components or some minor errors in the method, results or implications. Theory is relevant and accurately described, some components may not be present or are unclear. Connection to theory is mostly clear and complete, or has some minor errors. Shows careful reading of sources, but may not evaluate them critically. Attempts to define terms, not always successfully.Documentation should follow wither APA or MLA style.Uses effective number of sources to support claims.Only published conference or journal articles are accepted sources. (2) Developing Shows basic comprehension of sources, perhaps with lapses in understanding. If it defines terms, often depends on dictionary definitions.Documentation should follow wither APA or MLA style.Uses effective number of sources to support claims.Only published conference or journal articles are accepted sources. (1) BeginningPaper may misunderstand sources.Documentation should follow wither APA or MLA style.Uses effective number of sources to support claims.Only published conference or journal articles are accepted sources. (0) UnacceptableResearch selected is not relevant to the argument or is vague and incomplete – components are missing or inaccurate or unclear. Theory is not relevant or only relevant for some aspects; theory is not clearly articulated and/or has incorrect or incomplete components. Relationship between theory and research is unclear or inaccurate, major errors in the logic are present. Documentation should follow wither APA or MLA style.Uses effective number of sources to support claims.Only published conference or journal articles are accepted sources. Done