Voices Submission Rubric Not Appropriate for Ready for the Reviewing Requires Extensive Criteria Requires Some Revision Voices, see below for Process Revisions details Spelling, grammar, and The writing is competent, Numerous errors in language are consistent but undeveloped. spelling, usage, and Grammar and Sentence with graduate-level writing. Sentence structure is punctuation. Construction Prose is clear, readable. simplistic, but readable. Well-organized with a The organization is fairly Organization is deficient; compelling introduction, clear. The reader could lacking functional thesis, and body. Ample outline the piece. transitions, paragraphs are Organization supporting evidence. Paragraphs have adequate neither coherently development and are developed nor arranged. divided appropriately. Piece may greatly exceed stipulated word-count. Appropriately conveys a Perspective is dissonant, Espouses ethics or social work perspective displays some deficit in principles that are throughout the piece. understanding Social decidedly inconsistent with Social Work Values core principles. social work per Work’s “values,” the NASW code of ethics.* Contains inflammatory or offensive language. Topical, thoughtful and Topic is defined only Subject matter is irrelevant, well-researched. generally. The supporting flawed, or lacking in depth. evidence may also be Relevancy/Content general, or presented in an illogical or circuitous manner. *see the NASW website- - for more extensive breakdown of social work principles. NOTE: Voices accepts a variety of pieces, from poetry to research to visual media. The rubric is meant as a general guide. The editorial team realizes that not all submissions will have or similar content. “supporting evidence”
Voices Submission Rubric Criteria Ready for the Reviewing Process Requires Some Revision Requires Extensive Revisions Not Appropriate for Voices, see below for details Grammar and Sentence Construction Spelling, grammar, and language are consistent with graduate-level writing. Prose is clear, readable. The writing is competent, but undeveloped. Sentence structure is simplistic, but readable. Numerous errors in spelling, usage, and punctuation. Organization Well-organized with a compelling introduction, thesis, and body. Ample supporting evidence. The organization is fairly clear. The reader could outline the piece. Paragraphs have adequate development and are divided appropriately. Organization is deficient; lacking functional transitions, paragraphs are neither coherently developed nor arranged. Piece may greatly exceed stipulated word-count. Social Work Values Appropriately conveys a social work perspective throughout the piece. Perspective is dissonant, displays some deficit in understanding Social Work’s core principles. Espouses ethics or principles that are decidedly inconsistent with social work “values,” per the NASW code of ethics.* Contains inflammatory or offensive language. Relevancy/Content Topical, thoughtful and well-researched. Topic is defined only generally. The supporting evidence may also be general, or presented in an illogical or circuitous manner. Subject matter is irrelevant, flawed, or lacking in depth. *see the NASW website- - for more extensive breakdown of social work principles. NOTE: Voices accepts a variety of pieces, from poetry to research to visual media. The rubric is meant as a general guide. The editorial team realizes that not all submissions will have “supporting evidence” or similar content.
VoicesRubric.docx