ANALYTIC RUBRICS FOR RESEARCH PROPOSAL DEFENSE AND SCHOLARLY WRITING IN S2 PAI UNZAH

Abstract

This article formulates an analytic rubric framework for assessing research proposal defense and scholarly writing in the S2 PAI Program at Universitas Islam Zainul Hasan Genggong. Graduate research assessment frequently involves complex judgments about problem significance, theoretical coherence, methodological rigor, ethical responsibility, argumentation, and oral defense, yet criteria may remain implicit or be applied inconsistently. Using qualitative descriptive library research, the study synthesizes literature on rubric design, constructive alignment, feedback, oral assessment, and research competence. The findings indicate that proposal and writing assessment should use separate but connected criteria for problem formulation, literature synthesis, conceptual framework, method alignment, evidence-based argument, academic integrity, feasibility, and response to questioning. Performance descriptors must distinguish levels of quality without turning research into a mechanical checklist. Assessor calibration, annotated exemplars, criterion-level feedback, student self-assessment, and revision are necessary for reliability and learning. The study concludes that analytic rubrics can improve transparency and defensibility while preserving expert judgment when descriptors focus on evidence and relationships among research components.