| Criteria | | | | | |
|---|
| 13-15 Points
Clearly derived from the Case Study and are strongly and fully explained using a sophisticated level of writing. | 12 Points Derived from the Case Study and are clearly explained. | 10-11 Points Related to the Case Study and are explained. | 9 Points Not related to the Case Study and/or are not explained. | 0-8 Points Too few strategic goals/ objectives are presented, are not explained or exhibit little effort. |
|---|
| 20-22 Points Fully describes and is clearly derived from the Case Study, and demonstrates sophisticated analysis. | 17-19 Points Describes all aspects, is derived from the Case Study, and demonstrates effective analysis. | 15-16 Points Describes most aspects of the process being analyzed, and is related to the Case Study.
| 13-14 Points Does not describe some aspects, and/or is not related to the Case Study, and/or contains significant incorrect information. | 0-12 Points Not included, is extremely incomplete, or is not related to the Case Study. |
|---|
| 31-35 Points Correctly identified and sourced; clearly derived from the Case Study; demonstrates sophisticated analysis. | 28-30 Points Identified and sourced; requirements are derived from the Case Study; demonstrates effective analysis. | 24-27 Points Identified and sourced; requirements are related to the Case Study. | 21-23 Points Less than 10 requirements are identified and sourced; and/or information provided is not correct; and/or requirements are not all related to the Case Study. | 0-20 Points Few or no requirements are listed; sources are incorrect; and/or requirements are not related to the Case Study. |
|---|
| 8 Points Substantive corrections very effectively incorporated to reflect feedback received on Stage 2. | 6-7 Points Substantive corrections incorporated to reflect feedback received on Stage 2. | 5 Points Corrections incorporated to reflect feedback received on Stage 2. May not have addressed all key points or sufficiently corrected.
| 3-4 Points Minimal corrections made based on feedback received on Stage 2 – Some improvements still needed. | 0-2 Points No corrections made based on feedback received on Stage 2 and/or incorrect changes made. |
|---|
| 9-10 Points Required resources are incorporated and used effectively. Sources used are relevant and timely and contribute strongly to the analysis. References are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style. | 8 Points At least two sources are incorporated and are relevant and somewhat support the analysis. References are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style. | 7 Points Only one resource is used and properly incorporated and/or reference(s) lack correct APA style. | 6 Points A source may be used, but is not properly incorporated or used, and/or is not effective or appropriate; and/or does not follow APA style for references and citations. | 0-5 Points No course content or external research incorporated; or reference listed is not cited within the text. |
|---|
| 9-10 Points Very well organized and easy to read. Very few or no errors in sentence structure, grammar, and spelling; double-spaced, written in third person and presented in a professional format.
| 8 Points Effective organization; has few errors in sentence structure, grammar, and spelling; double-spaced, written in third person and presented in a professional format. | 7 Points Some organization; may have some errors in sentence structure, grammar and spelling. Report is double spaced and written in third person. | 6 Points Not well organized, and/or contains several grammar and/or spelling errors; and/or is not double-spaced and written in third person. | 0-5 Points Extremely poorly written, has many grammar and/or spelling errors, or does not convey the information. |
|---|
| Overall Score | | | | | |
|---|
| | | | | | |
|---|