MLT116 Term Paper Guidelines
Topic: A pathologic disorder related to an organ system approved by instructor.
Paper Requirements
Length & format: 2–4 pages (minimum 2 full pages of content), double-spaced, 12-pt Times New Roman, 1-inch margins.
Structure (use these headings):
I. Brief Description of Condition/Disorder
II. Effects on Organ Function
III. Treatment for the Disorder
IV. Specific Laboratory Findings (tests, expected values/patterns, and clinical interpretation)
Sources & citations: Use at least three reliable references (textbooks, peer-reviewed journals, reputable professional/medical websites, etc.). Cite
in-text and provide a reference list at the end in a consistent academic style (APA or MLA).
Academic integrity: Follow the course plagiarism policy; submit original work.
Submission: Due the assigned date per instructor. Submit the paper via Moodle (PDF or DOCX) unless otherwise instructed. Proofread for spelling and grammar before submission.
Oral Presentation: Video uploaded to your email Google drive and shared access "anyone with email." Link should be posted to the forum titled "Term Paper Forum."
Length: 5–10 minutes.
Expectations: Clearly summarize key points from your paper and be prepared to answer questions and lead brief discussion. Each student will be required watch all other student videos and to ask a relevant question to a minimum of 3 other student videos. Original poster is required to also answer each question by indicated date and include a citation for your response.
Grading (10% of course grade) Accuracy of Information: 30% Content & Organization: 25%
Grammar (appropriate to student level): 5% References Cited & Listed Properly: 5% Oral Presentation: 25%
Forum post/comments: 10%
Helpful Notes
In Section IV, connect each lab test to the pathophysiology (what’s measured, typical abnormal results, and why they change).
Keep figures/tables concise and label them; if used, they do not count toward the 2-page minimum.
Late work follows the course late-submission policy.
MLT116 Term paper grading rubric
|
Evaluation Criteria |
Inadequate/Poor <70% |
Adequate 70-79% |
Good 80-89% |
Excellent 90-100% |
Total Points |
Student Points |
|
Accuracy of information |
Relevant information is lacking, inaccurate, or incomprehensible |
Relevant information is present with some inaccuracies, lacks detail or is not clear |
Relevant information is accurate, clear and detailed, but lacks depth |
Relevant information is accurate, clear, detailed, and in depth |
|
|
|
Points |
<14 |
15-20 |
21-24 |
25-30 |
30 |
|
|
Content & Organization |
Unorganized, not focused, lacks logical format |
Somewhat organized; lacks some logic to content format |
Organized, lacks some logic to content format |
Well-organized, content presented in logical, easy to read format |
|
|
|
Points |
<14 |
15-18 |
19-21 |
22-25 |
25 |
|
|
References: Provide at least three references from sources such as journal articles, textbooks, class notes, reliable internet sources, personal conversations. Cite/list references in MLA format. |
No references |
Less than three references or unreliable references |
Minimum of three reliable references, not listed & cited properly |
Minimum of three reliable references, listed & cited properly |
|
|
|
Points |
0 |
1-2 |
3-4 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
Written communication, grammar & spelling, organization |
Numerous errors in grammar & spelling. Little evidence of proofreading. Organization is confused & lacks a clear focus. |
Several errors in grammar & spelling that distract from the impact of the paper. Language does not clearly communicate the meaning. |
Minimal errors in grammar & spelling. Errors do not distract from the overall impact of the paper. Organization is good. |
No errors in grammar & spelling. Written in clear & effective language. Paper is well thought-out, well-organized, & well-written. |
|
|
|
Points |
0 |
1-2 |
3-4 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
Oral Presentation |
Appears unprepared, makes numerous mistakes. Incorrectly pronounces terms. No eye contact with audience. Lacks enthusiasm for content presented. Does not meet minimum time requirements. |
Appears somewhat unprepared, makes several mistakes. Incorrectly pronounces terms. Lacks some enthusiasm for content presented. Minimal eye contact with audience. |
Appears prepared, but makes some mistakes. Pronounces most words correctly. Maintains direct eye contact with audience majority of time. Video meets minimum time requirements and shows enthusiasm for |
Appears well-prepared. Articulates well, pronounces terms properly. Maintains constant eye-contact with audience. Video meets minimum time requirements and shows enthusiasm for content presented |
|
|
|
|
|
|
content presented. |
|
|
|
|
Points |
0-10 |
11-19 |
20-22 |
23-25 |
25 |
|
|
Forum Posts |
No responses in discussion forum. |
Responds to fewer than 3 videos. Doesn’t respond to all questions on original post. Missing citations. |
Responds to a minimum of 3 classmates’ videos with questions. Responds to all classmates’ questions on original post including citations. Lacks enthusiasm or relevance in discussion. |
Responds to a minimum of 3 classmates’ videos with relevant questions. Responds to all classmates’ questions on original post including citations. Engages in appropriate scientific discussion. |
|
|
|
Points |
0 |
1-6 |
7-8 |
9-10 |
10 |
|
|
Total Points |
|
|
|
|
100 |
|