|
|
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
|
2
Less Than Satisfactory
65.00%
|
3
Satisfactory
75.00%
|
4
Good
85.00%
|
5
Excellent
100.00%
|
|
70.0 %Content
|
|
|
25.0 %Identification of Ethical Issues and Christian Principles and Values
|
The ethical issues and Christian principles and values stated have little to no relevance to the case study.
|
Either the ethical issues or the Christian principles and values pertaining to the case study are identified, but not both.
|
Ethical issues along with Christian principles and values pertaining to the case study are identified.
|
Ethical issues along with Christian principles and values pertaining to the case study are identified. At least one apparent tension between religious autonomy and physician recommendation are acknowledged.
|
Ethical issues along with Christian principles and values pertaining to the case study are identified. Any apparent tensions between religious autonomy and physician recommendation are acknowledged.
|
|
45.0 %Analysis of Ethical Issues and Christian Principles and Values
|
The analysis of the application of the Christian Worldview principles regarding the ethical issues has little to no relevance to the case study. Any conclusion is not supported.
|
The analysis of the application of the Christian Worldview principles regarding the ethical issues is lacking, but a viable conclusion can still be reached. The analysis shows that there is not an accurate understanding of the issues.
|
The analysis of the application of the Christian Worldview principles regarding the ethical issues is adequate in reaching a viable conclusion.
|
The analysis of the application of the Christian Worldview principles regarding the ethical issues is detailed in reaching a viable conclusion. A general, but not specific biblical perspective regarding medicine is discussed, along with how it relates to the issue of healing.
|
The analysis of the application of the Christian Worldview principles regarding the ethical issues is excellent in reaching a viable conclusion. An accurate biblical perspective with detailed interaction with the biblical text regarding medicine is clearly discussed, along with how it relates to the issue of healing.
|
|
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
|
|
|
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose
|
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
|
Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.
|
Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.
|
Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
|
Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
|
|
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction
|
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.
|
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.
|
Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
|
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
|
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
|
|
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
|
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.
|
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
|
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
|
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
|
Homework help – Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
|
|
10.0 %Format
|
|
|
5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
|
Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.
|
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.
|
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.
|
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.
|
All format elements are correct.
|
|
5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
|
Sources are not documented.
|
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
|
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
|
|
100 %Total Weightage
|
|
