Week 3 Navigating the Library Reflection

REQUIRED READINGS

APA

McDonald, K. E., & Cook, A. (2020). Seventh edition of APA style: a foundation for advocacy in counseling [Manuscript submitted for publication]. School of Counseling, Walden University.

Walden University. (n.d.a). APA style: Overview. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/ap…

Note: There are many tutorials, practice exercises, and diagnostic activities in the Walden sites. You are encouraged to review all of them to get a good overview of the APA guidelines for basic formatting, paraphrasing, peer reviewing of content, scholarly writing, and the principles of academic integrity.

Academic Integrity and Plagiarism

Walden University. (n.d.c). Site search. Retrieved from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/m…
Note: The Writing Center’s plagiarism prevention modules focus specifically on the appropriate ways writers should incorporate and cite sources they use in their writing.

Paraphrasing

The Writing Center, Walden University Library. (n.d.). Using evidence: Paraphrasing. The basics of paraphrasing. Retrieved from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/e…
Note: Please review the various Paraphrasing Strategies Media provided at this site.

Rubric for Research Paper

			Outstanding – 20pts	Good  – 15pts	Fair – 10pts	Unacceptable – 5pts
	Outline		Excellent section headings, indicative of a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics and subtopics clearly indicated. Professional looking.	Good section headings, indicative to a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics clearly indicated, could use more subtopics.	Fair section headings, indicative that the paper has “flow”. Topics and subtopics not clearly indicated. Unclear organization of thoughts.	Disorganized appearance. Relevant topics missing or incorrect, paper has no indicative “flow”. Not professional.
Abstract			Highly informative, complete and easy to understand. Appropriate vocabulary is used. Abstract makes you want to read the paper.	Informative, complete and understandable. Appropriate vocabulary is used.	Somewhat informative and understandable.	Not very informative or understandable.
Structure			Thesis is clear, easy to find, and appropriate to the assignment. Thesis is supported by the rest of the paper. Paper contains a “roadmap” for the reader. There is a logical “flow” to the topics/arguments. Conclusion follows clearly from the arguments presented.	Thesis is clear and appropriate.   Thesis fairly well supported. Paper is fairly well organized. Conclusion follows from the rest of the paper.	Thesis is fairly clear. Inconsistent support for thesis. Paper weakly organized. Conclusion is acceptable.	Thesis unclear and/or inappropriate. Thesis not supported. Paper is not organized. Conclusion doesn’t follow from the rest of the paper.
Research			The evidence comes from a wide variety of valid sources. The bibliography is complete and reflects appropriate sources.	The evidence comes from the minimum valid sources. The bibliography is complete.	Valid sources are inconsistently used.  The bibliography contains minor formatting errors.	Multiple sources cited  incorrectly. Bibliography missing.
Critical Thinki		ng	Arguments are pertinent to the topic. Arguments are logical, supported with evidence. The key arguments have been made – no major points have been left out.	Arguments are pertinent to the topic.   Arguments are fairly logical and reasonably supported. Most key arguments have been made.	Arguments are not consistently pertinent, logical, or supported. Few key arguments have been made.	Arguments not pertinent. Arguments rarely, if at all, logical and supported. Almost no key arguments have been made.