[Solved] Business Finance – Accounting HOMEWORK

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

[>Accounting homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/business-finance-accounting)

**files (3)**

– ## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4INSTRUCTIONS.docx

– ## HSE490ASSIGNMENT3FEEDBACK2.docx

– ## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4RUBRIC.pdf

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4INSTRUCTIONS.docx**

Week Four Assignment

Top of Form

| | |
| — | — |
| Hide Assignment Information |
| Turnitin™ | |
| This assignment will be submitted to Turnitin™. |
| Instructions | |
| By the end of the week, submit draft of Chapter Two. |

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

## image1.gif

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT3FEEDBACK2.docx**

**Summary of Feedback**

1. Your voice is missing

· You are summarizing sources too much.

· The professor wants more of your opinion, analysis, and interpretation, not just what the article says.

2.

3. Don’t end paragraphs with a source

· Ending with a citation makes it look like you’re only summarizing.

· You need to tie the source back to your topic or argument in your own words.

4.

5. Weave sources into your discussion

· Instead of dumping information all at once, mix the research into your explanation.

· Connect the facts to your problem statement or research focus.

6.

7. Some facts need citations

· The professor noticed statements without sources.

· If it’s factual, it needs a reference.

8.

9. Some paragraphs are too long / run-on

· Break long paragraphs into smaller ones.

· Make each paragraph focus on one idea.

10.

**What the professor really wants overall**

· Less summary

· More analysis

· More connection to your topic

· Better paragraph structure

· Proper citations everywhere needed

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4RUBRIC.pdf**

Capstone Project Chapter Grading Rubric
Course: HSE490 Supervised Senior Project

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Analysis of

Information

/ 8.348.34 points

Completely exam-

ines the fundamen-

tal issues associated

with the research

question.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using current

and related litera-

ture that is credible,

authoritative and

focused.

7.5 points

Examines the funda-

mental issues asso-

ciated with the re-

search question but

there may be ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using litera-

ture that is credible,

but may be irrele-

vant, or outdated, or

have limited author-

ity in the discipline.

6.3 points

Examines some is-

sues associated with

the research ques-

tion but there are

more than a few ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Some Literature is

used that has ques-

tionable credibility,

or have issues re-

lated to relevancy,

currency or author-

ity in the discipline.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Examines

few if any issues as-

sociated with the re-

search question.

There are many ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Literature is used

that has minimal if

any credibility, or

relevancy, currency

or authority in the

discipline.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 1/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Evaluation of

Sources

/ 8.348.34 points

Demonstrates a

thorough appraisal

of the researched

information.

Sources have been

thoroughly reviewed

and assessed for

their contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as a congru-

ous and thoughtful

exposition of ideas.

7.5 points

Demonstrates a fair

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but may not

be thoroughly re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a thought-

ful exposition of

ideas.

6.3 points

Demonstrates a less

than fair appraisal of

the researched

information.

Sources have been

offered but for the

most part have not

been sufficiently re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a dis-

parate exposition of

ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or

Demonstrates no

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but there is

little if any review or

assessment of their

value

or contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as an incon-

gruous exposition of

ideas.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 2/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Communication

Skills

/ 8.338.33 points

Conveys complete

and exceptional in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains all required

technical compo-

nents specified in

the assignment.

Contains fewer than

five formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors.

APA Style is used

correctly

7.5 points

Conveys sufficient

information on the

fundamental issues.

Contains most re-

quired technical

components.

Contains no more

than 10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors but

errors do not de-

tract from

understanding.

Good effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

some errors that do

not detract from

overall product.

6.3 points

Conveys minimal in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains few re-

quired technical

components.

Contains more than

10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors that

detract from

understanding.

Some effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

more than a few er-

rors that detract

from overall

product.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Conveys

no information on

the fundamental

issues.

Contains very few or

no required techni-

cal components.

There are so many

formatting, gram-

matical, or spelling

that it is difficult to

read.

Little or no effort to

use the APA Style

properly.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 3/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Critical Thinking / 8.33

Synthesis of

Information

/ 8.33

8.33 points

Content is ex-

tremely well thought

out and at times

demonstrates origi-

nal thinking. Critical

analysis of resources

and information is

present via interpre-

tation and focused

discussion obvious.

7.5 points

Content is well

thought out but

there is little origi-

nality in the thinking

presented. Some

critical analysis is

done but there may

be areas where re-

sources and infor-

mation are dis-

cussed with minimal

focus and

interpretation.

6.3 points

Content is pre-

sented coherently

but may not be fully

developed at the

graduate level.

Originality of con-

tent is difficult to

determine or merely

presents what oth-

ers have already

written. Critical

analysis is minimal

as many areas

present resources

and information

with only surface

level discussion.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Content is

incoherent, or not

well-developed at

the graduate level.

Lacks Originality.

Mainly offers what

others have written

without focus, inter-

pretation or in-

formed discussion

No Critical analysis

is offered.

8.33 points

A consolidated, the-

matic integration of

the fundamental is-

sues. Extends re-

search well beyond

minimum

requirements.

7.5 points

A basic compilation

of the fundamental

issues, but integra-

tion of research into

a theme may be

fragmented in some

areas.

6.3 points

A response to some

individual issues

with insufficient re-

search and consoli-

dation of ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or little evi-

dence of combining

researched material

into a consistent

whole.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 4/5

Total / 50

Overall Score

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Quality of

Scholarly

Research

/ 8.338.33 points

Selected resources

are mostly scholarly,

peer-reviewed, and

represent a disci-

plined inquiry into

the research

question/problem

for study.

7.5 points

Selected resources

may contain some

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources, but

most are not. The

sources inform prac-

tice. There is some

effort at inquiry

into the research

question/problem

for study.

6.3 points

Selected resources

have few if any

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources.

Some sources do in-

form practice but

inquiry into the re-

search

question/problem

for study is either

scattered or missing.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Selected

resources are nei-

ther scholarly/peer-

reviewed nor do

they inform practice

meaningfully.

Connection to the

research

question/problem

for study is lacking

substance. There is

a lack of serious

research.

Honors
45 points minimum

Satisfactory 1
40 points minimum

Satisfactory 2
35 points minimum

Unsatisfactory
30 points minimum

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 5/5

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4RUBRIC.pdf**

Capstone Project Chapter Grading Rubric
Course: HSE490 Supervised Senior Project

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Analysis of

Information

/ 8.348.34 points

Completely exam-

ines the fundamen-

tal issues associated

with the research

question.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using current

and related litera-

ture that is credible,

authoritative and

focused.

7.5 points

Examines the funda-

mental issues asso-

ciated with the re-

search question but

there may be ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using litera-

ture that is credible,

but may be irrele-

vant, or outdated, or

have limited author-

ity in the discipline.

6.3 points

Examines some is-

sues associated with

the research ques-

tion but there are

more than a few ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Some Literature is

used that has ques-

tionable credibility,

or have issues re-

lated to relevancy,

currency or author-

ity in the discipline.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Examines

few if any issues as-

sociated with the re-

search question.

There are many ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Literature is used

that has minimal if

any credibility, or

relevancy, currency

or authority in the

discipline.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 1/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Evaluation of

Sources

/ 8.348.34 points

Demonstrates a

thorough appraisal

of the researched

information.

Sources have been

thoroughly reviewed

and assessed for

their contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as a congru-

ous and thoughtful

exposition of ideas.

7.5 points

Demonstrates a fair

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but may not

be thoroughly re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a thought-

ful exposition of

ideas.

6.3 points

Demonstrates a less

than fair appraisal of

the researched

information.

Sources have been

offered but for the

most part have not

been sufficiently re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a dis-

parate exposition of

ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or

Demonstrates no

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but there is

little if any review or

assessment of their

value

or contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as an incon-

gruous exposition of

ideas.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 2/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Communication

Skills

/ 8.338.33 points

Conveys complete

and exceptional in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains all required

technical compo-

nents specified in

the assignment.

Contains fewer than

five formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors.

APA Style is used

correctly

7.5 points

Conveys sufficient

information on the

fundamental issues.

Contains most re-

quired technical

components.

Contains no more

than 10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors but

errors do not de-

tract from

understanding.

Good effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

some errors that do

not detract from

overall product.

6.3 points

Conveys minimal in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains few re-

quired technical

components.

Contains more than

10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors that

detract from

understanding.

Some effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

more than a few er-

rors that detract

from overall

product.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Conveys

no information on

the fundamental

issues.

Contains very few or

no required techni-

cal components.

There are so many

formatting, gram-

matical, or spelling

that it is difficult to

read.

Little or no effort to

use the APA Style

properly.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 3/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Critical Thinking / 8.33

Synthesis of

Information

/ 8.33

8.33 points

Content is ex-

tremely well thought

out and at times

demonstrates origi-

nal thinking. Critical

analysis of resources

and information is

present via interpre-

tation and focused

discussion obvious.

7.5 points

Content is well

thought out but

there is little origi-

nality in the thinking

presented. Some

critical analysis is

done but there may

be areas where re-

sources and infor-

mation are dis-

cussed with minimal

focus and

interpretation.

6.3 points

Content is pre-

sented coherently

but may not be fully

developed at the

graduate level.

Originality of con-

tent is difficult to

determine or merely

presents what oth-

ers have already

written. Critical

analysis is minimal

as many areas

present resources

and information

with only surface

level discussion.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Content is

incoherent, or not

well-developed at

the graduate level.

Lacks Originality.

Mainly offers what

others have written

without focus, inter-

pretation or in-

formed discussion

No Critical analysis

is offered.

8.33 points

A consolidated, the-

matic integration of

the fundamental is-

sues. Extends re-

search well beyond

minimum

requirements.

7.5 points

A basic compilation

of the fundamental

issues, but integra-

tion of research into

a theme may be

fragmented in some

areas.

6.3 points

A response to some

individual issues

with insufficient re-

search and consoli-

dation of ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or little evi-

dence of combining

researched material

into a consistent

whole.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 4/5

Total / 50

Overall Score

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Quality of

Scholarly

Research

/ 8.338.33 points

Selected resources

are mostly scholarly,

peer-reviewed, and

represent a disci-

plined inquiry into

the research

question/problem

for study.

7.5 points

Selected resources

may contain some

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources, but

most are not. The

sources inform prac-

tice. There is some

effort at inquiry

into the research

question/problem

for study.

6.3 points

Selected resources

have few if any

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources.

Some sources do in-

form practice but

inquiry into the re-

search

question/problem

for study is either

scattered or missing.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Selected

resources are nei-

ther scholarly/peer-

reviewed nor do

they inform practice

meaningfully.

Connection to the

research

question/problem

for study is lacking

substance. There is

a lack of serious

research.

Honors
45 points minimum

Satisfactory 1
40 points minimum

Satisfactory 2
35 points minimum

Unsatisfactory
30 points minimum

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 5/5

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4INSTRUCTIONS.docx**

Week Four Assignment

Top of Form

| | |
| — | — |
| Hide Assignment Information |
| Turnitin™ | |
| This assignment will be submitted to Turnitin™. |
| Instructions | |
| By the end of the week, submit draft of Chapter Two. |

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

## image1.gif

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT3FEEDBACK2.docx**

**Summary of Feedback**

1. Your voice is missing

· You are summarizing sources too much.

· The professor wants more of your opinion, analysis, and interpretation, not just what the article says.

2.

3. Don’t end paragraphs with a source

· Ending with a citation makes it look like you’re only summarizing.

· You need to tie the source back to your topic or argument in your own words.

4.

5. Weave sources into your discussion

· Instead of dumping information all at once, mix the research into your explanation.

· Connect the facts to your problem statement or research focus.

6.

7. Some facts need citations

· The professor noticed statements without sources.

· If it’s factual, it needs a reference.

8.

9. Some paragraphs are too long / run-on

· Break long paragraphs into smaller ones.

· Make each paragraph focus on one idea.

10.

**What the professor really wants overall**

· Less summary

· More analysis

· More connection to your topic

· Better paragraph structure

· Proper citations everywhere needed

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4RUBRIC.pdf**

Capstone Project Chapter Grading Rubric
Course: HSE490 Supervised Senior Project

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Analysis of

Information

/ 8.348.34 points

Completely exam-

ines the fundamen-

tal issues associated

with the research

question.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using current

and related litera-

ture that is credible,

authoritative and

focused.

7.5 points

Examines the funda-

mental issues asso-

ciated with the re-

search question but

there may be ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using litera-

ture that is credible,

but may be irrele-

vant, or outdated, or

have limited author-

ity in the discipline.

6.3 points

Examines some is-

sues associated with

the research ques-

tion but there are

more than a few ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Some Literature is

used that has ques-

tionable credibility,

or have issues re-

lated to relevancy,

currency or author-

ity in the discipline.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Examines

few if any issues as-

sociated with the re-

search question.

There are many ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Literature is used

that has minimal if

any credibility, or

relevancy, currency

or authority in the

discipline.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 1/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Evaluation of

Sources

/ 8.348.34 points

Demonstrates a

thorough appraisal

of the researched

information.

Sources have been

thoroughly reviewed

and assessed for

their contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as a congru-

ous and thoughtful

exposition of ideas.

7.5 points

Demonstrates a fair

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but may not

be thoroughly re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a thought-

ful exposition of

ideas.

6.3 points

Demonstrates a less

than fair appraisal of

the researched

information.

Sources have been

offered but for the

most part have not

been sufficiently re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a dis-

parate exposition of

ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or

Demonstrates no

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but there is

little if any review or

assessment of their

value

or contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as an incon-

gruous exposition of

ideas.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 2/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Communication

Skills

/ 8.338.33 points

Conveys complete

and exceptional in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains all required

technical compo-

nents specified in

the assignment.

Contains fewer than

five formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors.

APA Style is used

correctly

7.5 points

Conveys sufficient

information on the

fundamental issues.

Contains most re-

quired technical

components.

Contains no more

than 10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors but

errors do not de-

tract from

understanding.

Good effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

some errors that do

not detract from

overall product.

6.3 points

Conveys minimal in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains few re-

quired technical

components.

Contains more than

10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors that

detract from

understanding.

Some effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

more than a few er-

rors that detract

from overall

product.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Conveys

no information on

the fundamental

issues.

Contains very few or

no required techni-

cal components.

There are so many

formatting, gram-

matical, or spelling

that it is difficult to

read.

Little or no effort to

use the APA Style

properly.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 3/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Critical Thinking / 8.33

Synthesis of

Information

/ 8.33

8.33 points

Content is ex-

tremely well thought

out and at times

demonstrates origi-

nal thinking. Critical

analysis of resources

and information is

present via interpre-

tation and focused

discussion obvious.

7.5 points

Content is well

thought out but

there is little origi-

nality in the thinking

presented. Some

critical analysis is

done but there may

be areas where re-

sources and infor-

mation are dis-

cussed with minimal

focus and

interpretation.

6.3 points

Content is pre-

sented coherently

but may not be fully

developed at the

graduate level.

Originality of con-

tent is difficult to

determine or merely

presents what oth-

ers have already

written. Critical

analysis is minimal

as many areas

present resources

and information

with only surface

level discussion.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Content is

incoherent, or not

well-developed at

the graduate level.

Lacks Originality.

Mainly offers what

others have written

without focus, inter-

pretation or in-

formed discussion

No Critical analysis

is offered.

8.33 points

A consolidated, the-

matic integration of

the fundamental is-

sues. Extends re-

search well beyond

minimum

requirements.

7.5 points

A basic compilation

of the fundamental

issues, but integra-

tion of research into

a theme may be

fragmented in some

areas.

6.3 points

A response to some

individual issues

with insufficient re-

search and consoli-

dation of ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or little evi-

dence of combining

researched material

into a consistent

whole.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 4/5

Total / 50

Overall Score

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Quality of

Scholarly

Research

/ 8.338.33 points

Selected resources

are mostly scholarly,

peer-reviewed, and

represent a disci-

plined inquiry into

the research

question/problem

for study.

7.5 points

Selected resources

may contain some

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources, but

most are not. The

sources inform prac-

tice. There is some

effort at inquiry

into the research

question/problem

for study.

6.3 points

Selected resources

have few if any

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources.

Some sources do in-

form practice but

inquiry into the re-

search

question/problem

for study is either

scattered or missing.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Selected

resources are nei-

ther scholarly/peer-

reviewed nor do

they inform practice

meaningfully.

Connection to the

research

question/problem

for study is lacking

substance. There is

a lack of serious

research.

Honors
45 points minimum

Satisfactory 1
40 points minimum

Satisfactory 2
35 points minimum

Unsatisfactory
30 points minimum

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 5/5

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4INSTRUCTIONS.docx**

Week Four Assignment

Top of Form

| | |
| — | — |
| Hide Assignment Information |
| Turnitin™ | |
| This assignment will be submitted to Turnitin™. |
| Instructions | |
| By the end of the week, submit draft of Chapter Two. |

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

## image1.gif

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT3FEEDBACK2.docx**

**Summary of Feedback**

1. Your voice is missing

· You are summarizing sources too much.

· The professor wants more of your opinion, analysis, and interpretation, not just what the article says.

2.

3. Don’t end paragraphs with a source

· Ending with a citation makes it look like you’re only summarizing.

· You need to tie the source back to your topic or argument in your own words.

4.

5. Weave sources into your discussion

· Instead of dumping information all at once, mix the research into your explanation.

· Connect the facts to your problem statement or research focus.

6.

7. Some facts need citations

· The professor noticed statements without sources.

· If it’s factual, it needs a reference.

8.

9. Some paragraphs are too long / run-on

· Break long paragraphs into smaller ones.

· Make each paragraph focus on one idea.

10.

**What the professor really wants overall**

· Less summary

· More analysis

· More connection to your topic

· Better paragraph structure

· Proper citations everywhere needed

**## HSE490ASSIGNMENT4RUBRIC.pdf**

Capstone Project Chapter Grading Rubric
Course: HSE490 Supervised Senior Project

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Analysis of

Information

/ 8.348.34 points

Completely exam-

ines the fundamen-

tal issues associated

with the research

question.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using current

and related litera-

ture that is credible,

authoritative and

focused.

7.5 points

Examines the funda-

mental issues asso-

ciated with the re-

search question but

there may be ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Analyzes key ele-

ments using litera-

ture that is credible,

but may be irrele-

vant, or outdated, or

have limited author-

ity in the discipline.

6.3 points

Examines some is-

sues associated with

the research ques-

tion but there are

more than a few ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Some Literature is

used that has ques-

tionable credibility,

or have issues re-

lated to relevancy,

currency or author-

ity in the discipline.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Examines

few if any issues as-

sociated with the re-

search question.

There are many ele-

ments that do not

address the main

question

sufficiently.

Literature is used

that has minimal if

any credibility, or

relevancy, currency

or authority in the

discipline.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 1/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Evaluation of

Sources

/ 8.348.34 points

Demonstrates a

thorough appraisal

of the researched

information.

Sources have been

thoroughly reviewed

and assessed for

their contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as a congru-

ous and thoughtful

exposition of ideas.

7.5 points

Demonstrates a fair

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but may not

be thoroughly re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a thought-

ful exposition of

ideas.

6.3 points

Demonstrates a less

than fair appraisal of

the researched

information.

Sources have been

offered but for the

most part have not

been sufficiently re-

viewed and as-

sessed for their con-

tribution to answer-

ing the research

question.

The work is pre-

sented as a dis-

parate exposition of

ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or

Demonstrates no

appraisal of the re-

searched

information.

Sources have been

offered but there is

little if any review or

assessment of their

value

or contribution to

answering the re-

search question.

The work is pre-

sented as an incon-

gruous exposition of

ideas.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 2/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Communication

Skills

/ 8.338.33 points

Conveys complete

and exceptional in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains all required

technical compo-

nents specified in

the assignment.

Contains fewer than

five formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors.

APA Style is used

correctly

7.5 points

Conveys sufficient

information on the

fundamental issues.

Contains most re-

quired technical

components.

Contains no more

than 10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors but

errors do not de-

tract from

understanding.

Good effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

some errors that do

not detract from

overall product.

6.3 points

Conveys minimal in-

formation on the

fundamental issues.

Contains few re-

quired technical

components.

Contains more than

10 formatting,

grammatical or

spelling errors that

detract from

understanding.

Some effort to use

the APA Style al-

though there are

more than a few er-

rors that detract

from overall

product.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Conveys

no information on

the fundamental

issues.

Contains very few or

no required techni-

cal components.

There are so many

formatting, gram-

matical, or spelling

that it is difficult to

read.

Little or no effort to

use the APA Style

properly.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 3/5

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Critical Thinking / 8.33

Synthesis of

Information

/ 8.33

8.33 points

Content is ex-

tremely well thought

out and at times

demonstrates origi-

nal thinking. Critical

analysis of resources

and information is

present via interpre-

tation and focused

discussion obvious.

7.5 points

Content is well

thought out but

there is little origi-

nality in the thinking

presented. Some

critical analysis is

done but there may

be areas where re-

sources and infor-

mation are dis-

cussed with minimal

focus and

interpretation.

6.3 points

Content is pre-

sented coherently

but may not be fully

developed at the

graduate level.

Originality of con-

tent is difficult to

determine or merely

presents what oth-

ers have already

written. Critical

analysis is minimal

as many areas

present resources

and information

with only surface

level discussion.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Content is

incoherent, or not

well-developed at

the graduate level.

Lacks Originality.

Mainly offers what

others have written

without focus, inter-

pretation or in-

formed discussion

No Critical analysis

is offered.

8.33 points

A consolidated, the-

matic integration of

the fundamental is-

sues. Extends re-

search well beyond

minimum

requirements.

7.5 points

A basic compilation

of the fundamental

issues, but integra-

tion of research into

a theme may be

fragmented in some

areas.

6.3 points

A response to some

individual issues

with insufficient re-

search and consoli-

dation of ideas.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or little evi-

dence of combining

researched material

into a consistent

whole.

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 4/5

Total / 50

Overall Score

Criteria Honors Satisfactory 1 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory Criterion Score

Quality of

Scholarly

Research

/ 8.338.33 points

Selected resources

are mostly scholarly,

peer-reviewed, and

represent a disci-

plined inquiry into

the research

question/problem

for study.

7.5 points

Selected resources

may contain some

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources, but

most are not. The

sources inform prac-

tice. There is some

effort at inquiry

into the research

question/problem

for study.

6.3 points

Selected resources

have few if any

scholarly, peer-re-

viewed sources.

Some sources do in-

form practice but

inquiry into the re-

search

question/problem

for study is either

scattered or missing.

5.4 points

No submission (0

points) or Selected

resources are nei-

ther scholarly/peer-

reviewed nor do

they inform practice

meaningfully.

Connection to the

research

question/problem

for study is lacking

substance. There is

a lack of serious

research.

Honors
45 points minimum

Satisfactory 1
40 points minimum

Satisfactory 2
35 points minimum

Unsatisfactory
30 points minimum

3/23/26, 8:52 AM Week Four Assignment – HSE490 Supervised Senior Project – National University System

https://navigate.nu.edu/d2l/lms/dropbox/user/folder_submit_files.d2l?db=121403&grpid=0&isprv=0&bp=0&ou=85319 5/5