Marco Project

Ranges

90 – 100%

80 – 89%

79 – 0%

Criteria

Exceeds Performance Expectations 11.25 - 12.5 points

Meets Performance Expectations 10 – 11.125 points

Does Not Meet Performance Expectations 0 – 9.875 points

Communication

Clear, correct, and concise use of English grammar with no spelling or punctuation errors. Employs professional writing without colloquial language. Organization is easy to follow and congruent with graduate level writing skills.

Clear, correct, and concise use of English grammar with some spelling and/or punctuation errors. Employs professional writing with some colloquial language. Organization is not easy to follow but the submission is written at the graduate level.

Confusing, incorrect, and or wordy use of English grammar with many spelling and or punctuation errors. Employs unprofessional writing with a significant amount of colloquial language. Organization is not easy to follow, and the submission is not written at the graduate level. Or did not submit.

Critical thinking

Clearly identified explained the main issues, questions, or problems under critical consideration.

Accessed more than enough information to investigate the issues or problems.

Evaluated the information in a logical and organized manner to determine its value and relevance. Considered and analyzed information in context to the issue or problem.

Developed outstanding ideas, conclusions or decisions, and checked them against the most relevant criteria and benchmarks.

Adequately identified and explained the main issues, questions, or problems under critical consideration.

Accessed sufficient information to investigate the issues or problems.

Evaluated most of the information in a logical and organized manner to determine its value and relevance. Considered and analyzed most of the information in context to the issue or problem.

Developed well-reasoned ideas, conclusions or decisions, and may have checked them against relevant criteria and benchmarks.

Did not clearly identify explained the main issues, questions, or problems under critical consideration.

May not have accessed an sufficient amount of information to investigate the issues or problems.

Did not use a logical and organized manner to determine the value and relevance of information. May have considered and analyzed information but not in the context of the issue or problem.

Did not develop well-reasoned ideas, conclusions or decisions, and may not have checked them against relevant criteria and benchmarks.

Risk Assessment, Analysis, and Management

Correctly identifies & provides accurate & detailed descriptions of the most relevant & serious issues, challenges, and/or problems facing the company. Shows superior knowledge of the company's current financial situation & strategic issues. Provides a focused diagnosis of the issue(s) & justifies that diagnosis using evidence presented in the case.

Correctly identifies & provides accurate & detailed descriptions for some of the most relevant & serious issues, challenges, and/or problems facing the company. Shows above average knowledge of the company's current financial situation & strategic issues. Provides a focused diagnosis of some of the issue(s) & justifies that diagnosis using some evidence presented in the case.

Does not correctly identify & provide accurate & detailed descriptions for most of the most relevant & serious issues, challenges, and/or problems facing the company. Shows below average knowledge of the company's current financial situation & strategic issues. Does not provides a focused diagnosis of some of the issue(s) & does not justifies that diagnosis using evidence presented in the case. Or, did not submit.

Measurement, analysis, and interpretation

Accurately measured all of the relevant, reliable, and verifiable data. Accurately and thoroughly analyzed the most relevant accounting data and interpreted the results for stakeholders using appropriate business language (avoiding jargon).

Accurately measured some of the most relevant, reliable, and verifiable data. Accurately and thoroughly analyzed some of the relevant accounting data and interpreted the results for stakeholders using appropriate business language (avoiding jargon).

Did not accurately measure the most relevant, reliable, and verifiable data. Inaccurately and with little degree of thoroughness analyzed a small amount of the relevant accounting data and/or misinterpreted the results for stakeholders using inappropriate business language. Or did not submit.

Research

Correctly identified all of the relevant professional frameworks, standards and guidance.  Indicates an exceptional understanding of the topic (connecting it with our readings or other sources). 

Correctly identified an adequate amount of the relevant primary issue(s). Indicates a satisfactory understanding of the topic. 

Did not identify the relevant primary issue(s).  Or did not submit. Indicates a limited understanding of the topic, reflecting what other students have already posted or repeating information that was in the assigned project. 

Process and Research Management

Assessed all existing business processes for planning and to detect potential operational deficiencies.

Assessed some of the existing business processes for planning and to detect potential operational deficiencies.

Did not assess the existing business processes for planning and to detect potential operational deficiencies.

Governance perspective

Correctly identified all of the relevant issues, standards and guidance. Indicates an exceptional understanding of the topic (connecting it with our readings or other sources).

Correctly identified an adequate amount of the relevant primary issue(s). Indicates a satisfactory understanding of the topic.

Did not identify the relevant primary issue(s).  Or did not submit. Indicates a limited understanding of the topic, reflecting what other students have already posted or repeating information that was in the assigned project.

Professional behavior

The student submitted deliverable(s) that are no less than 90% of his/her original work with 100% accurate in-text citations and a reference list in perfect APA format. No evidence was found to suggest the student did not prepare the deliverable(s) in a manner consistent with the character and high standards set by the AICPA, other professional accounting organizations and associations, and the graduate school of UMGC

The student submitted deliverable(s) that include no less than 80% of his/her original work with no less than 80% accurate in-text citations and a reference list that is no less than 80% of perfect APA format. No evidence was found to suggest the student did not prepare the deliverable(s) in a manner consistent with the character and high standards set by the AICPA, other professional accounting organizations and associations, and the graduate school of UMGC

The student submitted deliverable(s) that include less than 80% of his/her original work, exclusive of correct in-text citations. There may be inaccurate in-text citations and or a reference list with APA formatting errors. Verifiable evidence may have been found to suggest the student did not prepare the deliverable(s) in a manner consistent with the character and high standards set by the AICPA, other professional accounting organizations and associations, and the graduate school of UMGC

Overall Score

Exceeds Performance Expectation 90% to 100%

Meets Performance Expectation 80% to 89%

Does Not Meet Performance Expectation 0 to 79%