Approach to Evaluation

All written assignments should be submitted by 4pm on the due date. They MUST be submitted as Word Documents by email to paul.kershaw@ubc.ca with the subject “SPPH 581N 2018 Assignment [add number]”.

There are four assignments. Each feeds into the next, while inviting you to rethink your initial work. Time will be given to work on the first three assignments in class, and time permitting, you will have a chance to present drafts to your classmates for feedback. The fourth assignment invites you to reflect on your experience producing the first three.

General Assessment Rubric Applied to Written Assignments in SPPH 581N

Thanks to Professors Susan Cox and Charlyn Black for sharing rubrics they use in their classes.

Component/Grade

C or Lower

Reflection (if required)

· Assignment includes thoughtful personal interpretations and a personal point of view

· Assignment includes some personal interpretations and a point of view

· Personal interpretations/point of view are shallow and insincere, confusing, or missing altogether

Context & background

· Ideas are clearly described and all content is clearly related

· All specific concepts are clearly defined; all relevant background information is clearly described

· Ideas are described and most content is related

· Most specific concepts are defined; some definitions lack clarity, or some piece of background information is missing

· Ideas are ambiguous, content appears to be unrelated

· Several specific concepts are not defined, or relevant background information is missing or not clearly described

Substantive content

· Merging of course content and personal analysis of this content is well integrated

· Challenges, questions, points of confusion are critically examined

· Merging of course content and personal analysis of course content is visible

· Challenges, questions, points of confusion are listed but not critically examined

· Course content and personal perspective are disconnected

· Challenges, questions, points of confusion are not considered

Organization & coherence

· It is clear how all of the ideas are related

· Connections drawn are logical and claims are supported by evidence

· Order of ideas is effective

· Assignment is structured so that there are discrete sections with specific ideas discussed in each

· It is somewhat unclear how all of the ideas are related

· Connections drawn are somewhat logical, claims are supported by evidence that is not always strong

· Order of ideas is somewhat ineffective

· There is some evidence of structure in the assignment, but the sections are not totally discrete

· It is unclear how all of the ideas are related

· Connections drawn are difficult to follow, claims are either supported by weak evidence or unsupported

· Order of ideas is ineffective

· Assignment lacks discrete sections and there is little structure

Accuracy, depth & insight

· Content reflects comprehension and insight regarding cognitive concepts

· The assignment displays evidence of depth of thinking

· Content suggests some misconceptions about cognitive concepts

· The assignment is somewhat superficial

· Content indicates a lack of comprehension of cognitive concepts

· The assignment is mostly devoid of meaningful content

Writing style

· The language and vocabulary used is effective and clear

· The tone of the assignment is appropriate for the audience

· The assignment employs an economy of words

· Appropriate use and citation of relevant literature

· The language and vocabulary used is mostly clear

· The tone of the assignment is appropriate for the audience most of the time

· The assignment is generally efficient in use of words, and rarely relies on stock phrases to fill space