Grading Criteria

Below is an explanation of the criteria I will use to grade your papers.  At the end of this document you will find the worksheets I will use in evaluating your papers.  While the emphasis is on content, good writing is also given significant consideration.  Research and experience have shown that good writing promotes clear, deep, and careful thinking and understanding.  Furthermore, good technical writing skills will be essential in most of your careers. 

The First Submission

My evaluation of the first submission of your paper will be based on four components:  physics content, reasoning, structure and organization, plus a review and deadlines category to ensure that you go through the review process and submit materials on time.  Each component is explained in detail in the following sections. 

Physics Content:  This part of your evaluation is a measure of the quality of the information in your paper.  The topic should be relevant to Physics 222.  There should be enough depth so that the reader can understand your topic and enough breadth to make the paper significant and interesting.  The physics should, of course, be correct.  I will also consider whether you have used good judgment in your choice of ideas to include and exclude and the quality of the sources you have used.  It should be obvious that you did significant research on the topic, and that you carefully filtered what you learned such that the paper contains the ideas which are most relevant to the paper’s focus.

Reasoning:  I expect your paper to be more than just a report of what you found in the literature.  You should put something of yourself into it.  This part of your evaluation concerns conclusions you have drawn from what you have read.  I will judge how well you’ve connected ideas from the various sources available to you.  I will look for a critical reading of the articles you consulted and for an understanding of their content.  I will check the conclusions you have drawn and examine whether they are logically consistent and agree with the data from your research. A well-reasoned paper will have solid, tight logic.  Your analysis should be clear, concise, and without fallacy.  It should be obvious what physical concepts and experiments you are reporting and explaining, and what conclusions you have drawn.  You will do well in this section if I find your paper convincing and persuasive.

Structure and Organization:  This part of the evaluation is a measure of how well organized your paper is.  In a well organized paper arguments flow in a logical way.  The paper should have a well-developed focus that ties the entire paper together.  Each paragraph should play a role in developing the focus.  Ideas and arguments should be somewhat compartmentalized --- each piece of the puzzle should be examined and discussed, and then you should move onto the next piece.  Similar concepts should be grouped together, not fragmented through the paper, and a given topic should only be discussed once.  A well written paper mirrors a well written outline.  The paper should have a solid abstract which reveals what is contained in the body of the paper and explains the focus of the paper.  The paper should end with a summary of the important ideas presented.  And although I will focus on the broader structure of the paper rather than the wording of sentences and organization inside of each paragraph, I still expect you to use good grammar and spelling.

Review and Deadlines:  I expect you to go through the process of writing a proposal, an outline, drafts, having them reviewed by peers and Writing Fellows, rewriting and polishing. This must all be done by the announced deadlines in order to get full credit for your paper.  Part of this score will also be based on how much you contributed to the group’s efforts.  After submitting the paper to me you will each send me an email stating your name, and then listing each member of your group along with one of the following ratings for this person: “adequate participation,” “inadequate participation,” “did almost none of the work,” or “did not participate at all.”

The Second Submission

My evaluation of the second submission of your paper will be based on four components:  physics reasoning, expression, overall quality of the paper, plus a review and deadlines category to ensure that you go through the review process and submit materials on time.  Each component is explained in detail in the following sections. 

Content and Reasoning:  This is similar to the “Physics content” and “reasoning” sections for the first submission.  I expect you to continue to think about the ideas in your paper and refine your understanding of the material after your first submission of the paper, so I will be holding you to an even higher standard in this category for the second submission.

Expression:  Great ideas with faultless reasoning are pointless if you can't get them across.  This part of my evaluation deals with the mechanics of your writing.  Your paper should have proper grammar, spelling, and an attractive and functional appearance.   Your style should be appropriate to your audience (fellow Physics 222 students) and topic.  Paragraphs should be well-connected, with good transitions.  Each paragraph should discuss a single idea which is defined in a “key sentence” early in the paragraph.  Paragraphs should develop their idea logically, completely, and concisely.  Sentences should be clear and concise.  Although the goal of a technical paper is not to convey the most information with the least number of words, one goal is to convey the most information with the least amount of time and effort for the reader. 

Overall Quality:  This category will evaluate how well the final paper turned out.  I will see if you made the corrections I suggested after the first submission.  I will judge how well the paper flows overall and how interesting it is.  I will also check whether you have all of the details correct.  You should have appropriately formatted citations, references to figures, etc.  The paper should look nice visually.  Figures should look nice and convey ideas clearly.  Pretty pictures can do a lot to call attention to your paper --- but beware of eye candy!  The reader will not take you seriously if your figures don’t convey information densely and clearly.  Pretty pictures that don’t help the reader understand the material, or which seem out of place, turn readers off like a cheesy car salesman in an expensive suit.  Every non-obvious idea, every quote, and every figure which is taken from another source should be properly cited.  Each figure should have a concise caption beginning with a title for the figure.  There should be a specific reference to each figure in the paper’s main body of text.  Figures, tables, and equations should be located near to the first spot in the text where they are mentioned.

Review and Deadlines:  This is similar to the “review and deadlines” category for the first submission.  The only difference will be that there will be no “proposal” or “outline” for the second submission, but there will be a category for your presentation (see below).

The Presentation

Near the end of the semester you will be giving a short (8 minute) presentation on your research to the class.  I will schedule a time for each group.  You should all work to prepare a PowerPoint presentation, and then elect one of your group to give the presentation.  The one selected should give the presentation to the rest of the group and get their suggestions for improvement several times before presenting in class.