BUSINESS LAW- FALL 2008                                                                               Semester Research Paper:  50 Points Total

The Preliminaries

Topic and initial research material  @ 3 pts

 Topic applies to Business Law and was submitted on time with lead research article (dated no earlier than 8/01/08): 3 pts. Topic applies to Business Law but was submitted with lead research article (dated no earlier than 8/01/08) no more than 1 week late: 2pts. Topic does not apply to Business Law but was submitted on time with lead research article (dated no earlier than 8/01/08): 2 pts. Topic does not apply to Business Law and was submitted with lead research article (dated no earlier than 8/01/08) no more than 1 week late 1 pt. Submitted more than 1 week late (regardless of applicability):  0 pts.  

Topic Approved by instructor

Yes, approved to continue to outline phase

 Yes, approved to continue to outline phase No; resubmit  No; resubmit  

Yes, proceed

 No, resubmit

  

Outline @ 7 pts

 Submitted on time, shows progress: 7 pts. Submitted on time, but progress questionable, or submitted <1 week late but shows good progress:   6 pts. Submitted late and progress questionable: 4 pts. Submitted late and progress obviously being not made:  2: pts. Submitted more than a week late (regardless of thoroughness):  0 pts.  

Preliminary Draft   @ 15 pts

 Submitted on time, shows significant progress; research to date attached: 15 pts. Submitted on time but progress questionable; research to date attached: 12 pts. Submitted on time, but barely satisfies definition of a "draft", OR submitted no more than 1 week late but is complete: 7 pts. Submitted no more than 1 week late and barely satisfies definition of an "draft": 5 pts. Submitted more than a week late (regardless of thoroughness):  0 pts.  

THE FINAL PAPER

Graded Preliminary Draft @ 1 pt.

 Attached to back of report as an appendix (with original grading rubric):  1 pt. Not attached to back of report:  0 pts. .

Report Format

@ 4 pts.

 Follows good report format, i.e., cover page reflects a title related to the content, is bound, has 1" margins, page numbers, quotes are footnoted, section headings indicated where/if appropriate, bibliography, length as instructed; copies of all research material submitted as exhibits to the report : 4 pts. Generally follows good report format, i.e.,  title relates to content, copies of all research material submitted as exhibits to the report, but may lack one of the following:  binding or cover sheet, margins may be slightly more than 1", page numbers or section headings may be missing, slightly less than length needed to adequately cover topic, or font enlarged to create length.  Quotes are, however, footnoted and bibliography complete:     3 pts. Acceptable report format, but lacks two or more of the following:  title, cover sheet, margins too wide, page numbers or section headings may be missing, length significantly less than needed to address topic or font enlarged to create length.  Documentation was poorly constructed or absent., but  copies of all research material were submitted as exhibits to the report.   2 pts. Weak report format; lacks two or more of the following:  title, cover sheet, margins too wide, page numbers or section headings may be missing, length significantly less than that necessary to cover topic or font enlarged to create length, or Documentation was poorly constructed or absent and source material not attached as exhibits: 1 pt. Weak report format; lacks two or more of the following:  title, cover sheet, margins too wide, page numbers or section headings may be missing, length significantly less than necessary to cover topic or font enlarged to create length, and copies of research material, footnotes and/or bibliography missing:        0 pts. .

Syntax, grammar, punctuation, spelling, typos @ 5 pts.

 Exceptionally well edited.  Very readable, sentences and topic threads flow logically, no or very few errors: 5 pts. Well edited:  Readable with no more than 3 errors per page, none of which seriously detract from the readability of the work:    4 pts. Generally edited, but readability could have been improved with additional editing.  No more than 5 errors per page: 3 pts. More than 5 errors per page; readability of the work  diminished: 2 pts. No apparent effort made to edit; errors significantly detract from work's readability; areas of incomprehensibility: 1 pt. .

Information Seeking/Selecting and Evaluating @ 5 pts.

 Information from a variety of quality electronic and print sources, including appropriate licensed databases. Sources are relevant, balanced and include critical readings relating to the topic. 5 pts. Information was gathered from a variety of relevant sources--print and electronic: 4 pts. Information was gathered from a limited range of sources and/or displayed minimal effort in selecting quality resources: 3 pts.

Information lacked relevance, recency, quality, depth and/or balance: 2 pts.

 No research beyond the text: 0 pts.  

Legal Reasoning @ 10 pts.

 Product displays creativity and originality; voice of the writer is evident. Topic is supported by documented research and fully cited relevant case, shows a well thought out concept that breaks new ground and/or identifies trends and implications of the topic: 10 pts. Product displays creativity and originality; voice of the writer is evident. Topic is presented in a legally sound manner, is supported by documented research (no cited case), is consistent with legal reasoning, shows a well thought out concept that identifies trends and/or implications of the topic: 8 pts. Topic is supported by documented research, but voice of the writer is infrequent.  Paper  fails to adequately address trends and implications of the topic.  Concept is there, but not well developed: 6 pts. Bulk of discussion simply involved restating information; voice of the writer is silent.  Concept not developed: 4 pts.  

Comments: