Research Paper 1 Rubric Criteria Levels of Achievement Content (70%) Advanced 92 to 100% Proficient 84 to 91% Developing 1 to 83% Not Present Total Content Mastery 51 to 55 points: Provided comprehensive details describing all hazards approach including risk assessment, intelligence usage, and mitigation strategies (prevention as well); preparedness, and response including NRF, NIMS, ICS, and unified command; and recovery – including resiliency and continuity of operations planning. Integrated a detailed Biblical perspective regarding the phases of emergency management. 46 to 50 points: Provided details describing all hazards approach including risk assessment, intelligence usage, and mitigation strategies (prevention as well); preparedness, and response including NRF, NIMS, ICS, and unified command; and recovery – including resiliency and continuity of operations planning. Integrated a Biblical perspective regarding the phases of emergency management. 1 to 45.5 points: Details were lacking or incomplete describing all hazards approach including risk assessment, intelligence usage, and mitigation strategies (prevention as well); preparedness, and response including NRF, NIMS, ICS, and unified command; and recovery – including resiliency and continuity of operations planning. Integration of a Biblical perspective was lacking regarding the phases of emergency management. 0 points: Not present Clarity & Coherence 41.5 to 45 points: Completed an exhaustive research paper explaining the fundamentals of the all hazards approach to homeland security and or emergency management. The paper was very thorough. Provided exemplary details. The argument, evidence, and conclusion of the essay are coherently written and organized. 37.5 to 41 points: Completed a research paper explaining the fundamentals of the all hazards approach to homeland security and or emergency management. Details were adequate. 1 to 37 points: The research paper lacked details explaining the fundamentals of the all hazards approach to homeland security and or emergency management. 0 points: Not present Reasoning & Support 37 to 40 points: Showed an excellent level of analysis and critical thinking. Details were superb and detailed enough to draw an excellent illustration as to how and why all hazards is called for. Numerous citations from required sources to support assertions. 33.5 to 36.5 points: Showed an appropriate level of analysis and critical thinking. Details were sufficient and germane enough to illustrate how and why all hazards functions as it does or should. The argument, evidence, and conclusion of the essay are relatively clear. Adequate citations from required sources to support assertions. 1 to 33 points: Showed an inadequate level of analysis and critical thinking. Details were insufficient and lacking to clearly show how and why all hazards is called for. The argument, evidence, and conclusion of the essay are disrupted by poor organization. Significant gap ...