briefing note

Criteria from Associated Course and Unit Outcomes

Unique and Distinguished (90-100%)

Unique and Distinguished

(80-89%)

Good (70-79%)

Needs Developing

(65-69%)

Fails to meet requirements /Inadequate (<64%)

Considerable evidence of original thinking – synthesizes information from high quality sources from and draws own clear, logical, and compelling conclusions; sophisticated ability to analyze, integrate, and extend course concepts; outstanding grasp of subject matter.

Evidence of original thinking – good ability to make appropriate links between course concepts; draws own logical and fairly compelling conclusions from quality information sources; solid grasp of subject matter evident.

Some evidence of original thinking – fair ability to make appropriate links between course concepts; draws own conclusions from information sources; arguments may not always be clear, compelling, or logical; some grasp of subject matter evident.

Minimal to no evidence of original thinking – weak/no ability to draw own conclusions; arguments rarely clear, logical or compelling; little to no capacity to make appropriate links between information sources and course concepts; very little/no credible information sources used to support argument; little to no grasp of subject matter evident.

Impact

Briefing note is engaging, persuasive and moving such that the reader feels compelled to take action and solve the issue immediately.

(18-20 points)

Briefing note is engaging, persuasive. The reader feels action is required to solve the issue now.

(16-17.9 points)

Briefing note is mostly engaging and persuasive. The reader may feel to some degree that action is required to solve the issue in the near future.

(14-15.9 points)

Briefing note is not always engaging and persuasive. The reader feels little motivation to take action and solve the issue in the distant future

(13-13.9 points)

Briefing note is neither engaging nor persuasive. The reader feels little to no motivation to ever take action and solve the issue.

(0-12.9 points)

Quality of Briefing Note

Clear, accurate summary of the topic supported by detailed and relevant discussion in all content areas. Key message clear, and supported by accurate, detailed discussion.

(9-10 points)

Topic summarized well with an accurate and complete discussion evident in all content areas. Key message clear and mostly supported by accurate, detailed discussion.

(8-8.9 points)

Although topic was fairly well-summarized, discussion was not always relevant and sometimes lacked detail in the content areas. Key message could be inferred with support of accompanying discussion.

(7-7.9 points)

Explanations of key areas have several inaccuracies or are incomplete. A few minor key content areas of are missed and/or may have some ambiguity.

(6.5-6.9 points)

Explanations have many inaccuracies and most key content areas are incomplete and/or mostly ambiguous.

(0-6.4 points)

Level of Information Synthesis

Combines and evaluates existing ideas to form new insights. Obvious original thinking demonstrated in the development of a clear, logical argument.

(18-20 points)

Combines existing ideas to form new insights for the most part; some original thought demonstrated in addition to incorporating other authors’ ideas from information resources to develop a logical argument.

(16-17.9 points)

Combines existing ideas of other authors from information resources to develop a clear and logical argument; lacking in original thought.

(14-15.9 points)

Occasional evidence of combining existing ideas of other authors from information resources. Several transgressions evident in logic and clarity of argument.

(13-13.9 points)

Minimal/no evidence of combining existing ideas of other authors in any logical or clear manner. No evidence of critical thinking as evidenced by an argument that is illogical, unclear, and/or vague.

(0-12.9 points)

Research Effort and Use of Information Resources

Integrated extensive, varied, current, relevant, and credible information resources effectively throughout assignment to support claims and arguments.

(9-10 points)

Integrated multiple current, relevant, credible resources effectively throughout assignment to support claims and arguments.

(8-8.9 points)

Integrated information resources throughout most of the assignment to support claims and arguments but some resources may not be varied, current, entirely relevant or credible

(7-7.9 points)

Integrated information resources throughout some of the assignment to support claims and arguments but resources may not be varied, current, relevant, or credible.

(6.5-6.9 points)

Did not integrate information resources throughout any of assignment to support claims and arguments.

(0 points)

Total

/ 60 points

Essential Employment Skills (EES)

Unique and Distinguished (90-100%)

Unique and Distinguished

(80-89%)

Good

(70-79%)

Needs Development

(65-69%)

Fails to meet requirements /Inadequate (<64%)

Spelling/Grammar

No spelling and grammatical errors

(5 points)

There are occasional spelling errors (<2) or grammatical errors

(4 points)

There are more than occasional spelling errors (<3) or grammatical errors

(3.5 points)

There are numerous spelling errors (<5) or grammatical errors

(3.3 points)

Spelling errors are frequent (>5) or grammatical errors

(0-3.2 points)

APA@Contestoga Citations and Referencing

In-text citing and complete reference list meets APA@Conestoga Standards

(9-10 points)

There are some APA@Conestoga

In-text citation and/or complete reference list errors (<2)

(8-8.9 points)

There are occasional APA@Conestoga referencing errors (<3)

(7-7.9 points)

There are numerous APA referencing errors (>4) and/or citation – reference list mismatches

(6.5-6.9 points)

No complete reference list and/or no in-text citations, and/or evidence of plagiarism** and/or breach of copyright laws

(0 points)

Clarity/Flow/ Layout

Clear and logical flow and layout

(9-10 points)

Clear and easy to read & follow

(8-8.9 points)

Requires concentration to read and follow

(7-7.9 points)

Challenging to read and follow

(6.5-6.9 points)

Very difficult to read and follow

(0-6.4 points)

Length

Within 3 page limit but greater than 2 pages (exclusive of complete reference list or appendices)

(5 points)

Up to 3 lines beyond 3 page limit and/or less than 2 pages (exclusive of complete reference list or appendices)

(4 points)

4 – 6 lines beyond 3 page limit and/or less than 2 pages (exclusive of complete reference list or appendices)

(3.5 points)

7-10 lines beyond 3-page limit and/or less than 2 pages (exclusive of complete reference list or appendices)

(3.3 points)

Grossly outside of 3 page limit and/or less than 2 pages (exclusive of complete reference list or appendices)

(0-3.2 points)

Format

Single-spaced

12’ font

Arial

Report format

(9-10 points)

Did not adhere to 1/4 criteria:

Single-spaced

12’ font

Arial font

Report format

(8-8.9 points)

Did not adhere to 2/4 criteria:

Single-spaced

12’ font

Arial font

Report format

(7-7.9 points)

Did not adhere to 3/4 criteria:

Single-spaced

12’ font

Arial font

Report format

(6.5-6.9 points)

Complete non-adherence to formatting guidelines

(0 points)

Total

/40

Late Penalty

Refer to Program Handbook

Conestoga College Policy from Student Handbook states “Late marks will be deducted at a rate of 10% per day, including weekends, from the total percent value of the assignment”. It is your responsibility to ensure your assignment is submitted to the Dropbox correctly and on time.

Academic Integrity

The Academic Integrity Policy is in effect for this assignment. It is your responsibility to ensure you know and understand what constitutes academic dishonesty and its consequences. *In the event of plagiarism, a grade of 0 will be assigned for that section of the rubric, a report of academic dishonesty will be filed according to the Academic Integrity Policy; the final grade will be assigned according to the academic integrity policy’s consequence and prior incident reports.

Total

/60 points plus / 35 points (minus _____ for late) = /100