Term Paper Marking Guidelines for Science 010 in 95-3

This short document is meant to give an overview of how we will try to mark your essays on an objective basis.

The forty marks for your essay are built up from four main categories, each divided into a number of subcategories. Each subcategory is worth a number of points. For example, under category A (Background research), subcategory c (integration of references into body of essay) is scored as good (3 points), average (2), poor (1), or not at all (0). Throughout, a high number is great, a low number is bad. The total score is obtained from the sum of all the subcategories. A brief explanation of each follows.

Critical to a successful essay is the background research and preparation. We will be judging how well you have used the literature. How much have you found, and more particularly, are the references you have used well-related to the theme of your essay? (5 points). Do you provide citations in the text so that readers will be able to go to the appropriate reference (2)? How well are integrated are the references that you write about - do they flow seamlessly into the body of your text (4), and how well do you explain what these references have to say (4)? Some references may be there for readers to be able to find, while you may want to write about others at length. You must provide a list of the references used. Reference formats are varied, but a usual rule is that you list only references cited in the text of your essay. Of course plagarism is against the rules. (Experienced essay readers can usually spot plagarized passages easily.)

A good essay has a definite structure; give your essay structure by carefully preparing an outline. We'll be looking for an introduction that tells the readers what you're writing about (3). We'll be asking whether your essay has a strong central theme (3) and whether you have combined two of the scientific disciplines in the course (biology, chemistry, math, physiscs) (3). Do your paragraphs follow each other logically and does each make a point (3), and do you reach a clearly stated conclusion (3)?

The writing itself is also important, although we're hoping that you already have the basics (if not very much practise). Is your writing clear (3)? Spelling and grammar are also important (2).

The presentation of your essay deserves a bit of consideration. Is it neatly prepared and presented, or is it scribbled onto crumpled foolscap pages stuck together with a suspicious looking green substance (2)? And finally, the marker is allowed a little leeway in assessing the 'gestalt' impression the essay leaves. Good writing, including good science writing, has verve and an individual quality, a certain 'je ne sais quoi' that is hard to define but is nevertheless there. Realizing that this is certainly more subjective than the other categories we have assigned it only 3 points, but this belies its real importance.

SUMMARY

Background research    use of literature on the topic     (5)
(15 points)            citations in the text              (2)
                       integration into body of essay     (4)
                       explanation of references in text  (4)

Structure              is there an introduction           (3)
(15 points)            is there a central theme?          (3)
                       two sciences represented?          (3)
                       paragraph structure                (3)  
                       conclusion(s) clearly stated?      (3)  

Writing                clarity                            (3)
(5 points)             spelling and grammar               (2)
                                                                
Gestalt                overall impression of the marker   (3)
(5 points)             presentation                       (2)
_______________________________________________________________
  
TOTAL                                                     (40 points)

Back to Sci 010 home page.


.../010paper_marking.html
Modified: 30/10/1995 by goddyn@sfu.ca (Luis Goddyn) from material prepared by ydenberg@sfu.ca (Ron Ydenberg).