12.00 Criteria for Assessing Quality of Papers

Writing a paper usually involves a series of steps or stages. During that process you should continually evaluate and reevaluate your essay.

"CRITERIA FOR GRADING COLLEGE WRITING" presents the minimum criteria for passing a freshman level college writing course, and the criteria used, in part, to assess course term papers.

The American Sociological Society's Committee on Research also suggests a number of criteria for assessing the quality of reports. The committee has also gives a range of interpretations or ratings that could result from the use of the criteria. Read these criteria and the ratings presented below and use them as a basis for outlining, writing, and evaluating your paper. They will be part of the overall criteria used in grading your paper(s).

If you have questions regarding the implications of the following criteria and ratings for your project, or on the grading of your paper, please see your instructor.

Index © UMD Library Catalog Search

12.01 Statement of Problem ⁴

1. Clarity of statement

   • Defective: Statement is ambiguous, unclear, biased, inconsistent, or irrelevant to the research.

   • Substandard: Problem must be inferred from incomplete or unclear statement.

   • Good/Very Good: Statement is unambiguous and includes precise description of research objectives.

   • Superior: Statement is unambiguous and includes formal propositions, and specifications for testing them.

2. Significance of Problem

   • Defective: No problem stated, or problem is meaningless, unsolvable, or trivial.

   • Substandard: Solution of the problem would be of interest to a few specialists.

   • Good/Very Good: Solution of the problem would be of interest to many.

   • Superior: Solution of the problem would be of interest to most.

3. Documentation

   • Defective: No reference to earlier work, or documentation is incorrect.

   • Substandard: Documentation to earlier work is incomplete or contains no citation or interpretation.

   • Good/Very Good: Documentation to earlier work is reasonably complete.

   • Superior: Documentation shows in detail the evolution of the research problem from previous research findings.

Index © UMD Library Catalog Search

12.02 Description of Method

1. Appropriateness of method

   • Defective: Problem cannot be solved by this method.

   • Substandard: Only a partial or tentative solution can be obtained by this method.

   • Good/Very Good: Solution of the problem by this method is possible, but uncertain.

   • Superior: Problem is definitely solvable by this method.

2. Adequacy of sample or field

   • Defective: Sample is too small, or not suitable, or biased, or of unknown sampling characteristics.

   • Substandard: The cases studied are meaningful, but findings cannot be projected.

   • Good/Very Good: Findings are projectable, but with error of considerable, or of unknown, magnitude.

   • Superior: Results are projectable with known small errors, or the entire universe has been enumerated.

3. Replicability

   • Defective: Not replicable.

   • Substandard: Replicable in substance, but not in detail.

   • Good/Very Good: Replicable in detail with additional information from the author(s).

   • Superior: Replicable in detail from the information given.

Index © UMD Library Catalog Search

12.03 Presentation of Results

1. Completeness

   • Defective: Relevant results are suppressed or omitted.

   • Substandard: Relevant results are presented in summary form.

   • Good/Very Good: Relevant results are presented, partly in detail, partly in summary form.

   • Superior: Relevant results are presented in detail.

2. Comprehensibility

   • Defective: Results are incomprehensible, or enigmatic.

   • Substandard: Comprehension of results requires special knowledge or skills.

   • Good/Very Good: Close study is required for comprehension.

   • Superior: Results are fully understandable at first careful reading by average intelligent reader.

3. Yield

   • Defective: No contribution to solution of problem.

   • Substandard: Useful hints or suggestions towards solutions of problem.

   • Good/Very Good: Tentative solution of problem.

   • Superior: Definitive solution of problem.

Index © UMD Library Catalog Search

12.04 Interpretation

1. Accuracy

   • Defective: Errors of calculation, transcription, dictation, logic or fact detected.

   • Substandard: Errors likely with the procedures used. No major errors detected.

   • Good/Very Good: Errors unlikely with the procedures used. No errors detected.

   • Superior: Positive checks of accuracy included in the procedures.

2. Bias

   • Defective: Evident bias in presentation of results and in interpretation.

   • Substandard: Some bias in interpretation, but not in presentation of results.

   • Good/Very Good: No evidence of bias.

   • Superior: Positive precautions against bias included in procedures.

3. Usefulness

   • Defective: Not useful.

   • Substandard: Possible influence on some future work in this area.

   • Good/Very Good: Probable influence on some future work in this area.

   • Superior: Probable influence on all future work in this area.