Applied-economics-policy-paper-rubrics.docx

Applied Economics – Policy Paper Section: 12-Matthew Economic Issue: Unemployment and lack of skilled workers in the Philippines and why skilled employees choose to work abroad Group Members: 1. Hannah Chua 4. Megan Chuatiamsing 7. Sonya Go 2. Rafael Chua 5.Kevson Lamadrid 8. Ralf Lim 3.Zachary Yeo 6. John James Yu Rubric: Content (10 points) Answer is appropriate to the question. Content is factually correct.

Analysis (10 points) Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc. Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view.

Organization (5 points) Clear sense of order. Established a thesis or topic sentence. Supporting points are presented in a logical progression.

Use of Language (5 points) Uses technical or economic terminology appropriately and correctly. No major grammatical or spelling errors.

(3.76 – 5.00) May lack a thesis sentence, but points are presented in a logical progression.

(3.76 – 5.00) Accurate word choice. No more than 2 major errors and a few minor errors.

(2.51 – 3.75) Logic of argument is minimally perceivable. Points presented in a seemingly random fashion, but all support argument.

(2.51 – 3.75) Ordinary word choice; use of technical or economic terminology avoided. Some serious errors (but they do not impair communication).

Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead. (7.60 – 10.00) Answer is appropriate to the question. Content may have one or two factual errors.

(7.6 – 10.00) Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc. Offers analyses and evaluations of obvious alternative points of view. Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.

(5.10 – 7.50) Content relates peripherally to the question; contains significant factual errors.

(5.10 – 7.50) Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

Score (30 points)

Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view. Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions. (2.60 – 5.00) Content unrelated to question.

(2.60 – 5.00) Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the points of view of others.

(1.26 – 2.50) Lacks clear organizational plan. Reader is confused.

(1.26 – 2.50) Limited vocabulary; errors impair communication.

(0 – 1.25)

(0 – 1.25)

Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view. Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason. (0 - 2.50)

(0 - 2.50)