University of Nebraska Kearney

UNK
Random UNK images
Assessment
related links

Biology Graduate Program Thesis Rubric

Rubric for the assessment of quality of thesis to be used to objectively select the Department of Biology's nomination for "Best thesis award".

Objective

Superior

Good

Average

Below Average

Scientific method used to implement research project. Hypotheses clearly stated by graduate student in his or her thesis. Clearly defined and provides novel test of problem Defined and well-written Discernible but not stated in testable form Not discernible from text or not scientifically testable
Students use appropriate methods to analyze results quantitatively where appropriate Quantitative methods are elegantly used to clearly describe results, no assumptions are violated Quantitative methods clearly describe the results, indicate confidence, and are appropriate Quantitative methods describe results but do not appropriately indicate levels of confidence Quantitative methods do not describe results or are inappropriate for data being analyzed
Thesis introduction provides appropriate historical context and literature review of the topic Introduction provides a comprehensive literature review and clearly relates to a logical extension of the research problem Introduction is well written and provides a contextual basis for research approach Thesis adequately reviews the literature but does not place research problem in context Introduction does not adequately provide a contextual framework
Materials and methods section are complete and clearly stated with appropriate reference to techniques chosen Procedures are so clearly stated that they could be used as a protocol Procedures clearly stated, some details or uncertainty exist Procedures are unclear but able to be interpreted Procedures are vague, disorganized, or have irrelevant information
Thesis discussion clearly integrates the results with existing scientific knowledge Discussion links results with published data in sufficient detail Discussion links results with previous studies but lacks sufficient details Discussion weakly integrates results with previous knowledge Discussion is purely restatement of results and lacks interpretation relating it to previous knowledge