Case Analysis
1
Case Grading Procedure
Your grade from each case analysis is determined using the following assessment rubrics:
Ethical Decision-Making Rubric - EDR
School of Business Writing Assessment Rubric – WAR
Review each of the rubrics below to see what is expected of you.
Your grade will be calculated as follows:
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑒 = 0.85 ( 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐸𝐷𝑅
50 ) + 0.15 (
𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑊𝐴𝑅
70 )
The total case grade will be out of 50 points.
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑒 × 50
2
Ethical Decision-Making Rubric Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet minimum performance levels.
Case Analysis Steps Standards Points
Ethical Issues:
Issue Identification All ethical issues are
properly identified (4
points)
Most ethical issues are
properly identified (3
points)
Some ethical issues are
properly identified (2 – 1
points)
No ethical issue is
properly identified (0
points)
Issue Definitions/Descriptions
and Factual Support Of those ethical issues
identified, all are
adequately defined/
described and supported
by case facts (6 points)
Of those ethical issues
identified, most issues
identified are adequately
defined/ described and
supported by case facts (5
– 4 points)
Of those ethical issues
identified, some issues
identified are adequately
defined/ described and
supported by case facts (3
– 1 points)
No issue identified is
adequately
defined/described and
supported by case facts (0
points)
Stakeholder Analysis:
Stakeholder Identification All key stakeholders are
properly identified (6
points)
Most key stakeholders are
properly identified (5 – 4
points)
Some key stakeholders are
properly identified (3 – 1
points)
No key stakeholder is
properly identified (0
points)
Identification of Stakes Of those stakeholders
identified, all important
stakes are properly listed
(4 points)
Of those stakeholders
identified, most important
stakes are properly listed
(3 points)
Of those stakeholders
identified, some important
stakes are properly listed
(2 – 1 points)
Of those stakeholders
identified, no important
stakes are properly listed
(0 point)
Ethical Decisions All short- and long-term
ethical issues are resolved
through the use of ethical
decisions (10 points)
Most short- and/or long-
term ethical issues are
resolved through the use
of ethical decisions (9 – 6
points)
Some short- and/or long-
term ethical issues are
resolved through the use
of ethical decisions (5 – 1
points)
Alternate decisions or
unethical decisions are
used to attempt to resolve
the ethical issues
identified (0 points)
Nonconsequentialist Analysis:
Subcharacteristic Identification
and Definition
Four of the top
subcharacteristics are
properly identified and
properly defined (4 points)
Three of the top
subcharacteristics are
properly identified and
properly defined (3 points)
Two of the top
subcharacteristics are
properly identified and
properly defined (2 points)
One of the top
subcharacteristics is
properly identified and
properly defined (1 point)
Subcharacteristic Justification All subcharacteristics are
properly used to justify
why chosen decisions are
ethical (6 points)
Most of the
subcharacteristics are
properly used to justify
why chosen decisions are
ethical (5 – 3 points)
Some of the
subcharacteristics are
properly used to justify
why chosen decisions are
ethical (2 – 1 points)
None of the
subcharacteristics are
properly used to justify
why chosen decisions are
ethical (0 points)
Consequentialist Analysis:
Stakeholder Stake Categorization All stakes identified in the
stakeholder analysis are
properly categorized as a
benefit and/or cost (8
points)
Most stakes identified in
the stakeholder analysis
are properly categorized as
a benefit and/or cost (7 – 5
points)
Several stakes identified in
the stakeholder analysis
are properly categorized as
a benefit and/or cost 4 – 1
(points)
No stakes identified in the
stakeholder analysis are
properly categorized as a
benefit and/or cost (0
points)
Identification of Decision Benefits/
Costs All benefits and/or costs
of decisions are properly
categorized (2 points)
Several benefits and/or
costs of decisions are
properly categorized (1
points)
No benefits and/or costs of
decisions are properly
categorized (0 points)
Total
3
School of Business Writing Assessment Rubric:
This written assessment rubric is designed around business writing assignments, including reports. The rubric is sectioned in three parts: correctness, style, and content. Each item in the table is evaluated on a scale of 5 – 1, with 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest. Correctness: This phase of writing is actually editing. The correctness phase ensures that writing conforms to standard English and document formatting. This phase identifies
adherence to grammar, spelling, punctuation, reading level, and document formatting based on standard business document formats.
Grammar
5 Writer establishes credibility with nearly perfect grammar.
4 Document contains some errors in grammar, but none that challenge reader understanding.
3 Document contains several errors in grammar that begin to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document contains frequent or persuasive errors in grammar that create barriers to reader understanding and seriously hurt the writer’s credibility.
1 Document contains excessive errors in grammar and destroys the writer’s credibility.
Spelling
5 Writer establishes credibility with nearly perfect spelling.
4 Document contains some spelling errors, but none that challenge reader understanding.
3 Document contains several spelling errors that begin to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document contains frequent or persuasive spelling errors that create barriers to reader understanding and seriously hurt the writer’s credibility.
1 Document contains excessive spelling errors and destroys the writer’s credibility.
Punctuation (using U.S. English rules)
5 Writer establishes credibility with nearly perfect punctuation.
4 Document contains some errors in punctuation, but none that challenge reader understanding.
3 Document contains several errors in punctuation that begin to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document contains frequent or persuasive errors in punctuation that create barriers to reader understanding and seriously hurt the writer’s credibility.
1 Document contains excessive errors in punctuation and destroys the writer’s credibility.
Reading Level
5 Writer establishes credibility with words that are on a level that is understandable to the intended audience.
4 Document contains parts that have reading level errors, but none that challenge reader understanding.
3 Document contains several reading level errors that begin to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document contains frequent or persuasive reading level errors that create barriers to reader understanding and seriously hurt the writer’s credibility.
1 Document contains excessive errors reading level that destroys the writer’s credibility.
Document Format (Design and Appearance)
5 Document uses design elements (white space, line spacing, indents, margins, titles and sub-titles, font size and style, etc.) that follow standard business formats for the type of document assigned.
4 Document is clean, but the appearance could be improved by more closely following and adhering to standard business formats for the type of document assigned.
3 Document has an amateurish look to it and/or is in need of a more professional appearance that follows standard document formats for the type of document assigned. The audience may be confused.
2 Document appears sloppy and unprofessional, and that sloppiness will certainly cause the audience to be confused.
1 Document looks as if the writer does not care about the appearance. The audience is completely confused and the appearance may even be misleading.
4
Style: This phase of writing goes beyond correctness. This phase involves evaluating the student work for word choice (choosing the right words), audience, writing effective
sentences, developing logical paragraphs, and setting an appropriate overall tone.
Words
5 Document uses words that are clear, concrete, vigorous, concise, and positive (when appropriate).
4 Document uses words are mostly clear, concrete, vigorous, concise and positive, but no word usage errors that challenge the reader’s understanding or hurt the writer’s credibility.
3 Document contains several errors in word usage that begin to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document contains frequent or pervasive word usage errors that create barriers to understanding and seriously hurt the writer’s credibility.
1 Document contains excessive errors in word usage that destroys the writer’s credibility.
Audience
5 Document is written for a clearly defined audience and has addressed that audience expertly and the writer has expertly followed the directions of the assignment/task.
4 Document audience is clear and the writer has done a good job of addressing the intended audience.
3 Document’s treatment of the audience is somewhat confusing; the writer does not seem to understand the audience of the document and may not have clearly understood the assignment/task.
2 Document’s treatment of the audience appears unprofessional and/or it is not clear who is being addressed, and the writer has not followed the directions for this assignment/task.
1 Document makes no effort to connect with an audience.
Sentence Style: Flow of Writing
5 Document uses clear, concise writing, making it easy to read. The writer used a variety of sentence types that effectively subordinate ideas (complex), coordinate relationships (compound), and add emphasis (simple).
4 Document uses a writing style and sentence structure that is good, but perhaps the writer could have written more clearly and/or written more concisely.
3 Document has some awkward and clumsy style, and/or the writer uses sentence structure that is unsophisticated.
2 Document has little coherent structure in the sentence style and is confusing.
1 Document’s sentence structure and sentence style is completely disorganized.
Paragraph Development
5 Document flow within paragraphs is logical and consistent, developing a single idea consistently. The writer uses effective transitional words, pronouns, repetition when appropriate, parallel structure and controls paragraph length..
4 Document flow within paragraphs sometimes lacks consistent and logical development or sometimes overlooks effective transitional words, pronouns, repetition when appropriate , parallel structure and paragraph length, but does not create barriers to understanding and does not seriously hurt the writer’s credibility.
3 Document flow within paragraphs is sometimes confusing, and may hurt the writer’s credibility.
` 2 Document paragraph development has little coherent structure and is confusing, and will hurt the writer’s credibility.
1 Document paragraph development is completely disorganized.
Overall Tone
5 Document is confident, courteous and sincere, and nondiscriminatory.
4 Document is mostly confident, courteous and sincere, and nondiscriminatory, but does not hurt the writer’s credibility.
3 Document contains several errors in tone that begin to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document contains frequent or pervasive tone errors that create barriers to understanding and hurt the writer’s credibility.
1 Document contains excessive errors in tone that destroys the writer’s credibility.
5
Content: This phase of writing includes the following: is the content appropriate for the purpose of the assignment; is the purpose clear to the audience; is the writing sensitive to the
needs of the reader; is all of information necessary; is any needed information missing; and evidence (ethics)?
Appropriate Purpose
5 Document is appropriate for the purpose of the assignment.
4 Document mostly identifies the purpose, but does not hurt the writer’s credibility.
3 Document identifies the purpose, but fails to completely associate the purpose with the assignment and begins to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document purpose is confusing and does not address the assignment effectively.
1 Document fails to identify the purpose.
Sensitivity to Audience Needs
5 Document is sensitive to the needs of the audience and the assignment.
4 Document is mostly sensitive to the needs of the audience and the assignment, but does not hurt the writer’s credibility.
3 Document begins to lack sensitivity to the audience and the assignment needs, and may hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document need is confusing and does not address the assignment effectively.
1 Document fails meet the audience and assignment needs.
Content
5 Document contains all necessary content for the purpose of the assignment.
4 Document mostly includes all necessary content, but does not hurt the writer’s credibility.
3 Document omits some content for the purpose of the assignment, and begins to hurt the writer’s credibility.
2 Document omits enough content to effectively complete the purpose of the assignment.
1 Document fails to include major portions of required content to complete the assignment.
Evidence (Ethics)
5 Document has excellent use of research and sources, helping strengthen/build the document’s main point(s) with this material.
4 Document makes good use of research and sources; in a few places the document’s main point(s) could have been strengthened with additional evidence.
3 Document would be substantially strengthened with more/better evidence, and/or the evidence presented is formatted in an incorrect, sloppy, or distracting way.
2 Document is weak because of the lack of evidence and support, and/or the evidence used is formatted so poorly that it’s difficult to tell what is cited.
1 Document’s use of evidence is unacceptable for a college-level writer.