Scribd
Upload
151 views2 pages

National Fire Academy Managing Officer Program Capstone Project Evaluation Form

Uploaded by

jeremy ramos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
151 views2 pages

National Fire Academy Managing Officer Program Capstone Project Evaluation Form

Uploaded by

jeremy ramos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

National Fire Academy

Managing Officer Program


Capstone Project Evaluation Form
Checklist of Criteria
Capstone Project Section Grading/Evaluation Rubric
for Section

Introduction ©© Problem statement clearly 4.0 rating — All criteria present


and precisely defined
Grade for the Introduction 3.0 rating — Some deficiency in
Section: ©© Purpose statement clearly criteria present
and precisely defined
2.0 rating — Moderate deficiencies in
©© Specific research method criteria present, but acceptable
(Whole number only) identified
1.0 rating — A number of
deficiencies to the extent where the
Introduction section is unacceptable

0.0 — Not present

Background and ©© Clear and complete 4.0 rating — All criteria present
Significance background analysis of
problem provided 3.0 rating — Some deficiency in
Grade for the Background criteria present
and Significance Section: ©© Sufficient evidence provided
to justify study from an 2.0 rating — Moderate deficiencies in
organizational perspective, criteria present, but acceptable
based on past, present and
(Whole number only) 1.0 rating — A number of
probable future impact on deficiencies to the extent where the
organizational effectiveness Background and Significance section
©© Definite linkage established is unacceptable
between the research 0.0 — Not present
problem and specific content
area(s) of the relevant
Managing Officer Program
course

Recommendations ©© Recommendations logically 4.0 rating — All criteria present


flowed from the results
Grade for the 3.0 rating — Some deficiency in
Recommendations ©© Recommendations were criteria present
Section: supported by the data
collected 2.0 rating — Moderate deficiencies in
criteria present, but acceptable
©© Recommendations provided
(Whole number only) for the organization 1.0 rating — A number of
deficiencies to the extent where
the Recommendations section is
unacceptable

0.0 — Not present


Checklist of Criteria
Capstone Project Section Grading/Evaluation Rubric
for Section

Content (Note: This is not a section 4.0 rating — All criteria present
of the project; it refers to the
Grade for Content: technical content of the entire 3.0 rating — Some deficiency in
capstone project.) criteria present

©© Any theories, principles and 2.0 rating — Moderate deficiencies in


(Whole number only) criteria present, but acceptable
procedures were presented
and used properly 1.0 rating — A number of
©© Information and data are deficiencies to the extent where the
accurate and up-to-date content is unacceptable

Writing ©© Correct grammar, 4.0 rating — All criteria present


punctuation, spelling,
Grade for Writing: sentence structure and 3.0 rating — Some deficiency in
typing/editorial style criteria present

©© All required sections of the 2.0 rating — Moderate deficiencies in


(Whole number only) criteria present, but acceptable
capstone project included

©© Certification Statement 1.0 rating — A number of


signed and included deficiencies to the extent where the
writing is unacceptable

Email Form Save

You might also like