edns 492 broader impacts essay

Excellent

Addressed the assignment prompt in an especially controversial, interesting, insightful, mature, or novel way

Good

Met most components of the criteria. Interesting but not particularly controversial.

Adequate

Made an adequate attempt to address the different components of the criteria.

Needs Improvement

Needs sufficient improvement to address the criteria.

Poor

Poor attempt to address the criteria.

Failed

Failed to answer the prompt; student did not understand the intent of the assignment at all.

Excellent

Inspiring, thought-provoking, and creative; strong evidence of the student’s engineering education; details strongly support concepts.

Good

Met most components of the criteria. Interesting but not overly thought-provoking. Arguments are good but could be stronger.

Adequate

Made an adequate attempt to address the different components of the criteria. Arguments are not particularly persuasive.

Needs Improvement

Needs to be more convincing in the arguments. Essay is not overly creative, exciting or thoughtful.

Poor

Poor attempt to address the criteria.

Failed to provide a readable or reasonable essay.

Excellent tone and style. Essay could be considered for professional publication, and has practically none of the issues listed.

Good

Writing is almost excellent — great except for one or two minor issues.

Adequate

Writing is mostly good but could improve further — a few issues with sentences and tone here and there.

Needs Improvement

Writing needs improvement for senior-level writing.

Difficult to Read

Writing makes work difficult to read and process; quality of writing is a big distraction.

Unacceptable Tone or Writing Quality

Inappropriate or unprofessional tone; errors of style that greatly inhibit readability.

Practically no spelling or grammatical errors, strong evidence of proofreading and quality control; practically no typographical errors.

Good

Minimal spelling, grammar, and typographical errors, perhaps one per page or less.

Adequate

A couple of spelling, grammar, or typographical errors per page, but does not detract from the overall work.

Needs Improvement

A few spelling, grammatical, or typographical errors per page; impacts readability; evidence of less care or proofreading in the work.

Difficult to read

Pervasive spelling, grammatical, and typographical errors makes work difficult to read and process; errors are a significant distraction.

Unacceptable / excessive level of spelling, grammar, and typographical errors.

Unacceptable level of spelling, grammar, and typographical errors; work is difficult to read and process.

Excellent argumentative essay format, well-organized and formatted essay follows or improves on conventions and lends strength to the author’s arguments; progression is clear and easy to follow; a comprehensive argument is made.

Good

Overall format is good, but lacking in an area, perhaps not uniformly well-formatted per argumentative essay expectations.

Adequate

Some issues with argumentative essay format; perhaps lacks an explicit thesis, which must be construed from the context of the work; or perhaps a bit weak on proponent or opponent arguments; overall not a bad argumentative essay, but needs some polish and revisiting of typical argumentative essay formatting and content expectations.

Needs Improvement

Essay makes somewhat of an argument and provides support, but main thrust or goal of the work is not readily evident; lacking significant consideration for opponent or proponent points of view; reads a bit more like an informative essay or a report on a topic rather than a persuasive or argumentative essay.

Poor

It is not evident why this was written, or if any argument is being made over one issue or another; seems like an informative paper, book report, or a mere topic of interest for the author to share with the reader.

No Marks

Thoroughly Researched, Complete Citations & References in IEEE Format: Background information and facts, proponents’ arguments, opponents’ arguments, statistics, and any relevant information which is not common knowledge are all thoroughly cited at the relevant point in the text and corresponding references provided at the end of the paper per IEEE formatting expectations. All the author’s statements and arguments and perspectives claimed by others are well-cited and referenced without formatting errors. Higher quality, scholarly, and authoritative references used wherever appropriate and available.

Good

Background information and facts, proponents’ arguments, opponents’ arguments, statistics, and any relevant information which is not common knowledge are NEARLY all thoroughly cited at the relevant point in the text and corresponding references provided at the end of the paper per IEEE formatting expectations. Perhaps a fact, statistic, or perspective needs a reference; perhaps the paper is well-researched, though there is a minor formatting issue. Perhaps a reference or two is of questionable quality or appropriateness, but only one or two of these minor issues, no pervasive problems.

Adequate

A couple of additional citations and accompanying references would be appropriate and desired; a couple of formatting issues; some of the references are not appropriate, or are not scholarly or authoritative when they should be. Multiple minor issues.

Needs Improvement

Citations and references provided mostly where needed and of questionable quality or formatting; lacking several appropriate citations and references.

Poor

Lacking many citations and references to buttress claims made in terms of background, facts, perspectives, statistics. Minimal attempt at research and citation and references, perhaps also substantial formatting issues per IEEE guidelines.

Unacceptable

Little to no evidence of research, citations, references, and formatting of these.