BABS1201 LITERATURE REVIEW RUBRIC

Criteria Excellent Very Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Not completed

Introduce Title clearly outlines Title outlines the Topic title may not Title too general or No informative title.
the topic the topic of the review. overall topic of the outline the topic area non- specific. No indication or
Introduction clearly review. or be too general. Overview of the topic reference is made to
indicates main purpose Indicates the main Adequately explains is unclear or not the topic or purpose
of topic, plan of purpose of the topic in the background, but specific enough so of the review. No
organization. general terms. Good may lack detail with the readers are not background
Comprehensive background detail. some key points sure what to expect of information.
background. Engages Reader is missed. Text text to follow.
reader & creates generally aware of organisation is a Background details
interest. Reader the overall topic of challenge to reader. are unclear, or
anticipates text to the review. 1.0 unrelated to topic. 0
follow. 1.5 0.5
2.0
Content Articulates the main Studies are generally Some gaps or Too few citations are The review bears
points of the topic described in enough redundant included to almost no
clearly & logically detail so that their information. be confident that that relation to the task set.
incorporates the relation to topic can Insufficient detail to literature has been Major sections of
literature to develop a be understood. provide a logical adequately reviewed pertinent content have
logical review of the Review is logical but review. Some of the & there is over- been omitted.
topic area. some sections are review seems to be reliance on direct
unclear. inaccurate or not well- quotations.
linked to the topic. Much of the review of
literature is
inaccurate or
unclear.
8.0 6.0 4.0
0
2.0
Research Identifies credible & Identifies credible & Identifies literature and Identifies literature but No indication of the
Process relevant literature and relevant literature and the process for this is the process for this is research process
the process for this is the process for this is explained, however not explained. taken nor the
clearly explained. explained with some some more detail is Limited description of selection process for
A succinct series details omitted. needed. Remarks on the research process the journal articles
description of the Remarks on the the research process taken and the
chosen.
research process research process taken and the selection process for
 taken and the taken and the selection process for the journal articles
selection process for selection process for the journal articles chosen.
the journal articles the journal articles chosen. One or more of the
chosen. chosen. Some of the One or more of the topics did not follow a
steps detailed were topics were unclear or logical explanation or
unclear or required did not follow a logical were excluded entirely
more detailed. explanation.
6.0 0
1.5
4.5 3.0
Conclusion A succinct statement Remarks show a good Remarks show a basic Limited analysis and No indication to
based on the review. analysis analysis synthesis of synthesise the
Insights and and synthesis of ideas. and synthesis of ideas. information or make
conclusions go beyond Conclusion effectively ideas. Some of the Many conclusions a conclusion based
restating the main summarise topics. conclusions not not supported in the on the literature.
answer to the research supported in the body of review.
question/ topic area. body of review.
3.0
2.0 1.5 1.0 0
Readability Writing is clear, and Writing is generally Occasional re-reading Efforts of interpretation Writing is confusing &
succinct. Writing indicates clear, but unnecessary necessary sometimes required on hard to
proofreading was words/phrases are for full comprehension. reader's part. follow. Reader often
performed. Material well occasionally used. Readability would be Frequent errors impact has to rely on own
organised and logically Evidence of proof improved with proof on readability. Little interpretation. Frequent
structured, with clear reading. reading. attempt at connectivity, errors impact on
breaks yet logical Structure could Some lack of though reader can readability. Lack of
connections between occasionally be clearer organisation. Not all deduce some organisation and very
introduction, body but communication not sections or paragraphs organisation. difficult to make
paragraphs, and impaired. follow a logical order. connection between
conclusion. ideas.
1.0 
3.0  2.0  0.5  0
References Includes the 4 required Includes 3 out of Includes 2 out of the Includes 1 out of the 4 No peer-reviewed journal
peer-reviewed journal the 4 required 4 required peer- required peer-reviewed articles.
articles (3 primary articles peer-reviewed reviewed journal journal articles. Errors in formatting of in
and 1 review article). journal articles. articles. Errors in formatting of in text citations.
In text citations formatted Majority of in text Errors in formatting of in text citations. Reference list is not in
correctly. citations formatted text citations. Reference list is not in Harvard style.
Reference list formatted correctly. Reference list is not in Harvard style.
correctly, using Harvard Reference list formatted Harvard style.
style. using Harvard style.

0.5  0
3.0  2.0  1.0 