This assignment is for you to objectively evaluate your draft to identify your writing's strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, grading your draft using the grading rubric provides a clearer understanding of the expectations and requirements for the final paper. This process should help you refine your work and improve your final submission.

BIS 300 Interdisciplinary Research Paper Grading Rubric

Criteria	Proficient (50 - 40)	Competent (39 - 30)	Developing (29 - 20)	No Evidence (19 - 0)
Introduction: Clear Research Topic and argument [50 points]	Addresses the topic fully and explores the topic thoughtfully and comprehensively.	Adequately addresses the topic and explores the issue.	Neglects parts of the topic. Demonstrates inadequacy in addressing the topic	Missing Research Topic
Interdisciplinary Rationale - lists disciplines [50 points]	Shows an understanding of disciplines or courses needed to fully explore topic.	Lists disciplines but rationale is superficial.	Only lists disciplines without any rationale.	Missing Interdisciplinary Rationale
Main Body: Literature Review and Knowledge Gap -Reporting principal findings and review; Structure and flow. [50 points]	Fully developed, detailed, clear and well stated. Logically coherent with supporting detail. Presented well thought knowledge gaps based on literature review. Created sections with headers. Has a logical flow.	Adequately developed with some detail. Some incoherent sentences or paragraphs. Presented knowledge gaps based on literature review. Created sections with headers, but illogical flow.	Logically flawed, several incoherencies. Incompletely developed arguments. Included underdeveloped knowledge gaps. Not well structured and difficult to follow. May or may not create sections with headers.	Missing Principal Findings and review from research articles and/or knowledge gaps. No coherent structure and flow.
Incorporation of scholarly sources; Included in-text Citations and Reference List; Paraphrasing. [50 points]	Demonstrates clear and logical incorporation of 5 or more scholarly sources and organization. Appropriately cited the sources. Paraphrased when presenting other scholars' ideas.	Somewhat organized and incorporated 5 scholarly sources. Adequately cited the sources. Mixed use of paraphrasing and direct quotes.	Demonstrates problems in organization and incorporation of sources. Used less than 5 scholarly sources. Not adequately cited the sources. Heavily relied on direct quotes rather than paraphrasing.	No scholarly sources. Missing Citations and/or Reference List.
Clear Conclusion and synthesis of research. [50 points]	Clear, coherent conclusion and logical organization.	Adequate conclusion.	Conclusion is lacking in coherency and structure.	No conclusion provided.

For this assighnment, there are 2 separate parts to complete. First, review your Interdisciplinary Synthesis Research DRAFT paper. Then write:

Part 1. Using above grading rubric, assess your DRAFT on the followings:

1. Grade your draft using the grading rubric for each of the five criteria, and briefly explain why.
2. Your overall impression and a summary of the main ideas.
3. Discussion of specific areas for improvement and justify your recommendations with concrete evidence and specific examples.
4. Discussion of specific areas that were well done.

Here is the checklist for your journal entry. Self-assess whether or not you included each of the following items:

• Title Page
• Introduction:
  • Research topic and/or research question
  • Aim and/or goal of the paper
  • Significance of your research
  • Interdisciplinary justification/rationaleensure you explain why the disciplines you listed are relevant to your topic
• Literature Review:
  • Organize this section by the themes you've outlined, creating sections with appropriate headers.
  • Include definitions of key terms
  • Summarize or paraphrase sources
  • Present your arguments/findings based on the information from the sources
  • Include in-text citations where appropriate
• Research Gap:
  • Indicate the research gap you identified through your research
  • Provide suggestions on how this gap might be addressed
• Conclusion
• List of References
• APA Style Formatting
• Organization and flow of the paper
• Grammatical errors and typos

Part 2. Reflections on your experience of writing an interdisciplinary research paper. Include at least 3 aspects from the list below.

1. Integration of Disciplinary Perspectives: How effectively did you integrate insights from different disciplines? Were there challenges in reconciling diverse perspectives, theories, or methodologies? How did you navigate these challenges?
2. Clarity of Communication: Consider the clarity of communication in your paper. Reflect on how well you conveyed complex interdisciplinary concepts to a diverse audience. Were there instances where disciplinary jargon or assumptions needed more explanation?
3. Conceptual Framework: Assess the development and application of your conceptual framework. How did it guide the integration of disciplinary insights? Did it effectively illustrate the connections between different elements and contribute to a cohesive narrative?
4. Handling of Conflicting Evidence: Consider instances where evidence or findings from different disciplines conflicted. How did you address these conflicts? Reflect on the decisions made and their impact on the overall coherence of the research paper.
5. Awareness of Interdisciplinary Gaps: Reflect on whether you identified and acknowledged gaps in interdisciplinary knowledge. Were there areas where certain disciplines had limited contributions or where interdisciplinary collaboration could have been more extensive?
6. Interdisciplinary Learning Experience: Reflect on the overall learning experience gained from writing an interdisciplinary research paper. How has the process contributed to your understanding of different disciplines? What skills have you developed or refined?
7. Personal Growth and Challenges: Consider how the challenges faced during the writing process contributed to your personal and academic growth. Were there moments of frustration or breakthroughs that significantly shaped your understanding of interdisciplinary research?