Rubric for Annotated Bibliography for Instructional Plan

Criteria and Qualities	High	Middle	Low
Point Value	Up to 5 points for each criteria and quality	Up to 4 points for each criteria and quality	Up to 3 points for each criteria and quality
Organization	Information is organized in a clear, appropriate, and precise manner	Information is organized in an appropriate manner, but may lack some clarity or consistency.	Information is poorly organized. Little or no description or detail. Ideas seem scrambled, jumbled, or disconnected.
Collaboration	Aptly explained how collaboration was achieved; problem(s) encountered; and, fix-up(s) for next time.	Explained how collaboration was achieved and some problem(s) encountered.	Explained how collaboration was achieved.
Bibliography	Accurate and extensive bibliography which exceeds 12 resources. Includes mostly print and a least one electronic resource. Citation for the article did follow APA format.	Accurate and less extensive bibliography which exceeds 12 resources. Includes all print resources and no electronic. Citation for the article did follow APA format, but without error.	Inaccurate and incomplete bibliography which has fewer than 12 resources. Citation for the article did not follow APA format.
Variety of Resources	Sources of high quality and varied	Most sources of high quality with some questionable sources. Some variety.	Inappropriate resources selected with little or no variety.
Writing Conventions	Excellent writing that enhances the readability of the paper. There are no errors in spelling, punctuation, or grammar.	Minor errors are present but they do not detract from the readability of the project.	Little or no evidence of correct writing. Poor conventions seriously limit the projects readability.
Subjective Evaluation of the Resource	Evaluation of the resource is concise. It includes well-defined statements on authority, scope, currency, arrangement, and special features. Annotations or reviews are appropriate and insightful.	Evaluation of the resource is brief. It includes less insightful statements on authority, scope, currency, arrangement, and special features. Annotations or reviews are somewhat vague.	Evaluation of the resource is unclear. It does not include all necessary components, e.g,, statements on authority, scope, currency, arrangement, and special features. Annotations or reviews are absent or vague.
Rationale for Selection of the Resource	Rationale is descriptive, insightful, and supports curricular goals and objectives.	Rationale is brief and somewhat supports curricular goals and objectives.	Rationale is not clearly stated or supports curricular goals and objectives.
Appropriate Resources Selected	Resources selected for instructional plan are of high quality and cost effective.	Resources selected for instructional plan are of good quality and cost effective.	Resources selected for instructional plan are of poor quality and/or the expense does not justify its utility for use with students.
Timeliness	Material is submitted on time.	Material was submitted up to one class late.	Material was submitted more than one class late.
NAME: .			DATE: