Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XI
Division of Davao De Oro
MONKAYO NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL-SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
Monkayo, Davao De Oro

EVALUATION OF RESEARCH PROPOSAL WITH SCORING RUBRICS

RESEARCH TITLE: ___________________________________________________________________________________

MANUSCRIPT
Outstandin
Unacceptable Acceptable Very Good
Dimensions g SCORE
(0-2) (3) (4)
(5)
Title X1
Rationale and Review of Related
X3
Literature
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework X2
Statement of The Problem X2
Significance of The Study X1
Scope and Limitations X1
Research Design X2
Research Respondents X1
Research Instrument X1
Research Procedure X1
Data Analysis X1
Citation and References X2
TOTAL SCORE

PRESENTATION
Name Content Mastery Speech/Voice clarity Wittiness TOTAL
(x3) (X3) (X2) (X5)
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

GENERAL COMMENTS:
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________.

___________________________________________

Panelist
 DESCRIPTIONS OF RATING SCALE  
5. Significance of The Study
Unacceptable- the study only addresses an issue or an
I. MANUSCRIPT epiphenomenon that has very limited transitional value
and only produces some incremental information.
1. Title Acceptable- The study addresses an important scientific
Unacceptable- not relevant to the intended study; lacks issue and can fill the existing knowledge gap in a
design information or is misleading. particular field.
Acceptable- relevant to the intended study and identifies Very good- The study addresses an important issue with
the problem but does not allow the reader to anticipate highly transitional potential; The findings from the
the design. proposed study is expected to fill the existing
Very Good- appropriate in tone and structure; identifies knowledge.
the problem and suggest design. Outstanding- The project addresses an important issue
Outstanding- appropriate in tone and structure to with high transitional potential; The findings from
education journals, contain necessary descriptors proposed studies are expected to fill the existing
(subjects, independent (IV) and dependent variables knowledge and have a probability of changing the
(DV)), and allows readers to anticipate design. existing paradigm.
   
2. Rationale and Review of Related Literature 6. Scope and Limitations
Unacceptable- Fails to adequately describe the Unacceptable- Scope and limitations are not adequately
problems; review of literature provides little of the addressed; response is limited or void.
background information. Acceptable- Scope is provided and most major
Acceptable- The problem is presented but the urgency is limitations are recognized; response is provided to how
not clear; review of literature provides most of the the study will address most of them.
background information. Very Good- Scope is clearly stated and major limitations
Very good- The problem and its urgency to be studied is are recognized; response is provided for how the study
provided; review of literature is appropriate, most will address most of them.
background information provided, critique points out Outstanding- Scope is properly stated and major
some but not all of the areas of needed study. limitations recognized; response is provided to how
Outstanding- The rationale provides a problem and study addresses each one.
urgency which would benefit the majority; review of  
literature is appropriate, provides background 7. Research Design
information and a critique of previous research that Unacceptable- Research design is inappropriate for the
points out weaknesses, conflicts, and areas of needed chosen problem.
study Acceptable- Research method that will be used is
  specified but the appropriateness of the research method
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework to the study or why it is best to use to investigate the
Unacceptable- The study does not provide an problem and/or address the research questions are not
appropriate theoretical and conceptual framework. stated.
Acceptable- The study provides a theoretical background Very good- Research method that will be used is
but does not clearly support the conceptual paradigm.   specified and the appropriateness of the research method
Very good- The study provides theories that will be the to the study or why it is best to use to investigate the
backbone of the study that connects the independent problem and/or address the research questions are
variable and the dependent variable; The conceptual somewhat stated.
framework shows the structure that is organized to Outstanding- Research method that will be used is
achieve a research’s purpose specified and the appropriateness of the research method
Outstanding- The study provides theories that will be to the study or why it is best to use to investigate the
the backbone of the study that connects the independent problem and/or address the research questions are
and the dependent variable; The conceptual framework academically stated.
is of complete parts and is organized including the  
indicators to achieve a research’s purpose. 8. Research Respondents
  Unacceptable- Inappropriate research respondents.
4. Statement of The Problem Acceptable- The research respondents are acceptable but
Unacceptable-The statement of the problem is unclear are lacking or not perfect enough to provide information.
and does not include any descriptor variables. Very good- The respondents are chosen based on
Acceptable- The statement of the problem includes 1 statistical means; however the type of respondents is not
descriptor variable and informs the reader of the purpose perfectly capable of providing the best data.
of the study Outstanding- The respondents are chosen based on
Very Good- The statement of the problem includes most statistical means and the type of respondents are
of the descriptor variables and informs the reader of the perfectly capable of providing the best data.
exact purpose of the study
Outstanding- The problem statement is concise, includes
descriptor variables and informs the reader of the exact
purpose of the study
 Outstanding- The slides are visually aiding the
presenters and making the presentations livelier and
9. Research Instrument smartly.
Unacceptable- The instrument is not appropriate for the II. PRESENTATION
study.
Acceptable- The instrument to be used is appropriate but 1. Content
lack enough validity. Unacceptable- the lines spoken are irrelevant and have
Very good- The instrument to be used is appropriate and no basis.
will undergo reliability and validity tests. Acceptable- the lines spoken are relevant to the study.
Outstanding- The instrument to be used is appropriate Very good- the lines spoken are relevant to the study
for the study and is standardized. with supporting explanations.
Outstanding- the lines spoken are very relevant to the
10. Research Procedure study with supporting explanations based from reliable
Unacceptable- Describes the process poorly in a non- sources.
scientific way such that it cannot be replicated
Acceptable- Presents a replicable process, all 2. Mastery
information in the document is related, however, fails to Unacceptable- the presenter does not know what he/she
identify some sources of data and/or represents is talking about.
disorganized information. Acceptable – the presenter has somewhat mastered the
Very good- Contains effectively, quantifiably, concisely lines based on the content.
organized information that allows the process to be Very good – the presenter has mastered the lines based
replicated, it is written so that all information inherent to on the lines and supporting information.
the paper can be related to this section, identifies the Outstanding- the presenter fluently presents the content
techniques used in data collection in the appropriate with mastery and appeal.
chronology, does not contain unnecessary wordy 3. Speech and Voice clarity
descriptions of procedures; but contains unnecessary Unacceptable- the voice is not clear and the presenter
information and or wordy descriptions within the section often mumbles.
Outstanding- Contains effectively, quantifiably, Acceptable- the voice is quite clear; the presenter most
concisely organized information that allows the process of the time speaks clearly and mispronounces no more
to be replicated, it is written so that all information than 10 words.
inherent to the paper can be related to this section, Very good – the voice is clear; the presenter speaks
identifies the techniques used in data collection in the clearly and distinctly all the time, and mispronounces no
appropriate chronology, does not contain unnecessary more than 3 words.
wordy descriptions of procedures; Outstanding – the voice is clear; the presenter speaks
  clearly and distinctly all the time, and there are no
11. Data Analysis mispronounced words.
Unacceptable- Inappropriate data analysis. 4. Wittiness
Acceptable- Provide the data analysis plan but are vague. Unacceptable – the presenter speaks/answers invalid
Very good- Discuss the procedures as to how you will claims.
score, record/encode and analyze your data to answer the Acceptable- the presenter speaks/answers correctly but
research problem/s; Identify the descriptive statistics could not support the claim properly.
and/or inferential. Very good -the presented speaks/answers correctly with
Outstanding- Discuss the procedures as to how you will proper basis.
score, record/encode and analyze your data to answer the Outstanding – the presenter speaks/answers correctly
research problem/s; Identify the specific descriptive with proper basis and confidence to persuade the
statistics and/or inferential. panelists of his/her claim.
 
12. Citations and References
Unacceptable- Reference list is incomplete and format is
incorrect; citations are incorrect
Acceptable- Reference list includes non-relevant articles
and is not in APA format; Most of the citations are
acceptable but few are lacking and incorrect.
Very good- Reference list is limited and is in correct
APA format; Most of the citations are correctly done but
few are incorrect done.
Outstanding- Reference list is relevant, complete and
broad enough to support the Introduction and is in
correct APA format; citations are correctly done.
 
13. PowerPoint Presentation
Unacceptable- The slides are not appropriate and have
many errors.
Acceptable- The slides are appropriate but have few
errors.
Very good- The slides are visually aiding the presenters
and do not contain errors.
Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by:

GRETCHEN D. INVENTO ANNABELLE A. BUCANEGRA RANDY M. VILLACORTEZA