Literature Review matrix
by Prashant Prasad Shiwakoti
Submission date: 14-Feb-2022 10:11PM (UTC+1100)
Submission ID: 1762070847
File name: 18.224100_117638323_1095057119_Literature_Review_matrix.docx (88.65K)
Word count: 1347
Character count: 8463
AssignmentTutorOnline
1
In text referencin
2
QM
FINAL GRADE
60/100
Literature Review matrix
GRADEMARK REPORT
GENERAL COMMENTS
Instructor
All members of your team should have the same description of the research problem,
research questions / objectives. In the case of your group these were different for every
member..
You have selected relevant articles and have summarised most of the sections
quite well. In particular you were able to identify many of the concepts of the
studies.
methodology section did not discuss approach and sampling in all 5 cases, nor
data collection in a couple of the articles.
Your synthesis and analysis tried to bring the articles together, this needed to be
expanded and be presented in a logical and clearer manner.. Furthermore it
would be useful to discuss how these articles are relevant for your own project.
PAGE 1
PAGE 2
Comment 1
No need for a specific date especially since you are doing the research next term
In text referencing
Check for correct referencing in text (APA 7th edition)
PAGE 3
PAGE 4
PAGE 5
PAGE 6
Comment 2
no comment
PAGE 7
PAGE 8
RUBRIC: BRH606 – LIT REVIEW MATRIX
RESEARCH
FAIL (0-49%)
PASS (50-64%)
CREDIT (65-74%)
DISTINCTION (75-84%)
HD (85-100%)
MATRIX
FAIL (0-49%)
PASS (50-64%)
CREDIT (65-74%)
DISTINCTION (75-84%)
HD (85-100%)
Credit (65-74%)
Quality and relevance of articles selected
Demonstrates a lack of research skills. Did not meet assessment requirements with regard to quantity and
quality of articles. Articles selected are not relevant to the research topic.
Demonstrates satisfactory research skills. Met the assessment requirements with regard to quantity of
articles. Selected articles are not always of high quality or relevant to the research topic.
Demonstrates good research skills. Met the assessment requirements in terms of quantity and quality of
articles. Selected articles are relevant to the research topic.
Shows clear evidence of research skills. Met the assessment requirements in terms of quantity and quality
of articles. Selected articles are highly relevant to the research topic.
Shows clear evidence of research skills, exceeding the given requirements. Exceed the assessment
requirements in terms of quantity and quality of articles. Selected articles are highly relevant to the
research topic.
Credit (65-74%)
Quality of matrix, iincluding understanding of research methods
Demonstrates no understanding of theory and the literature review process. Does not identify relevant
information from the articles.
Demonstrates limited understanding of theory and the literature review process. Does not always identify
all relevant information from the articles.
Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of theory and the literature review process. Identifies all
relevant information from the articles.
Demonstrates a good understanding of theory and the literature review process. Accurately identifies and
details all relevant information from the articles.
Consistently demonstrates a critical and advanced understanding of theory and the literature review
process. Accurately identifies and meticulously details all relevant information from the articles.
ANALYSIS
FAIL (0-49%)
PASS (50-64%)
CREDIT (65-74%)
DISTINCTION (75-84%)
HD (85-100%)
COMMUNICATION
FAIL (0-49%)
PASS (50-64%)
CREDIT (65-74%)
DISTINCTION (75-84%)
HD (85-100%)
Pass (50-64%)
Analysis and synthesis including identification of research gaps
Demonstrates limited synthesis and analysis of literature. Does not identify any research gaps.
Demonstrates satisfactory analysis and synthesis of literature, however, this is at times generic or
superficial. Identifies some research gaps, however these are not always clear and applicable to one’s
research.
Demonstrates good analysis and synthesis of literature. The ways in which the literature relates to one’s
own research is discussed. Identifies research gaps that are clear and applicable to one’s research.
Demonstrates critical and well-developed analysis and synthesis of literature. The ways in which the
literature relates to, and informs one’s own research is discussed. Accurately identifies research gaps that
are clear and applicable to one’s research.
Demonstrates critical and advanced analysis and synthesis of existing knowledge. Insights on how the
literature relates to, and informs one’s own research is detailed. Accurately positions the literature against
one’s own research to identify clear and relevant research gaps.
Credit (65-74%)
Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks
supporting evidence. Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. Line of
reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. Line of
reasoning is easy to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear and well
supported by evidence. Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic through a good line of
reasoning
Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating
a clear flow of ideas and arguments. Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic through an
excellent line of reasoning
- Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
- (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
- CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS
