The HNRS 110 class blog will serve as our collaborative research journal, where we will work through various problems and questions related to research more generally, and to your own research project more specifically. While there is no right or wrong way to write a research journal entry, there are certain qualities that distinguish a good entry from a poor one. To help you get a feel for what makes an excellent research journal entry, consider this rubric, which our GTA and I will use when reading and grading your posts.
Each post will be rated on a scale of 0-4, primarily on the basis of the kind of critical thinking and engagement you display in the post.
| Rating | Characteristics |
| 4 | Exceptional. The research journal entry is focused and coherently integrates examples with explanations or analysis. The entry demonstrates awareness of its own limitations or implications, and it considers multiple perspectives when appropriate. The entry reflects in-depth engagement with the topic. |
| 3 | Satisfactory. The entry is reasonably focused, and explanations or analysis are mostly based on examples or other evidence. Fewer connections are made between ideas, and though new insights are offered, they are not fully developed. The entry reflects moderate engagement with the topic. |
| 2 | Underdeveloped. The journal entry is mostly description or summary, without consideration of alternative perspectives, and few connections are made between ideas. The entry reflects passing engagement with the topic. |
| 1 | Limited. The entry is unfocused, or simply rehashes previous comments, and displays no evidence of student engagement with the topic. |
| 0 | No Credit. The entry is missing or consists of one or two disconnected sentences. |