International Business- Article Review

Assessment Task 1: Literature Review Marking Rubric (10 marks)

Unsatisfactory Acceptable Good Superior Outstanding Evidence of understanding of the article (out of 5)

Article poorly explained. Mostly copied from the article. Main topic of the article is not clear. Does not demonstrate adequate understanding of key arguments / theories in the article. Most supportive facts and information are inaccurate.

Weak explanation of the article. Over-reliance on quotations or poor paraphrases of the article. Main topic of the article is vague and hard to locate. Some relevant arguments / theories are discussed but some supportive facts and information are missing or explained inaccurately.

Good explanation of the article. Mostly explained and summarised in own words. Main topic of the article is identified and stated. Most relevant arguments / theories of the article are discussed. Most supportive facts and information are explained.

Article explained and summarised in own words clearly demonstrating solid understanding of the article. Main topic of the article clearly is identified and stated. Relevant arguments / theories are competently discussed and explained. Almost all supportive facts and information are explained accurately.

Excellent explanation of the article in own words demonstrating outstanding understanding of the article. Main topic and relevant arguments / theories are discussed thoroughly and clearly. Most salient facts and information are explained clearly and accurately.

Reflection on practical implication of the reading (out of 3)

No or limited identification / discussion of practical implications of the reading for managers of MNEs.

Practical implications are identified but its discussion is too general and does not explicitly allude to understanding of the article.

General reflection on the practical implication of the article. Connection between the article and the discussion of practical implication is made.

Practical implications are identified and discussed competently. Connection between the reading and managerial implications are made with supporting evidence.

Insightful reflection on practical implications of the article. Relevant connections between the reading and managerial implications are made clearly with supporting evidence.

Clarity of writing and writing technique (out of 2)

Argument is unclear and/or under-developed. Too difficult to read due to too many errors in expression, grammar, or spelling. Inappropriate referencing.

Argument is unclear and/or under-developed. Spelling and grammar require editing. Some sentences require rewriting for clarity and/or paragraph structure is poor in places. Writing style may be choppy in places and/or poor flow-on from one idea to the next. Lack of consistency in referencing.

Arguments need further development. Consistent referencing with minor errors of style or presentation. Occasional grammatical or spelling errors. Frequent awkward expressions. Perhaps some unexplained jargon.

Makes and supports persuasive arguments. Clearly written and free from grammatical errors. Consistent academic writing style, with well-structured sentences and paragraphs. Appropriate and correct referencing.

Makes and supports persuasive arguments. Sophisticated, clear and fluent writing. Correct spelling and grammar used effectively throughout. Highly effective academic writing style, with clear and consistent links to arguments in the thesis. Use of academic conventions such as referencing and citation is both consistent and appropriate.