Situation

9.0 pts

Full Marks

Response clearly and concisely informs the reader of the shipment delay, the recommendation to start the Herbert Street job first, the request for Scott to confirm his understanding of the plan, and the request for Scott to inform Lucia if he has any concerns. Response includes relevant information that will help explain the situation, such as: • two jobs are scheduled, and that the Herbert Street job is currently scheduled to begin after the corporate job. • The Herbert Street job MUST be completed before the weekend wedding, but the corporate job is scheduled for 2-3 weeks. • The window shipment was delayed, and if a replacement shipment does not arrive, then it is not possible to begin both jobs this week. • Although the replacement materials could arrive in time, Lucia wants Scott to should change the order of the two jobs and start the Herbert Street job first rather than the corporate job. The response does not include a significant amount of unnecessary detail.

6.75 pts

3/4 Marks

Response clearly informs the reader of the shipment delay and the recommendation to start the Herbert Street job first, although the request for Scott to confirm his understanding of the plan and the request for Scott to inform Lucia if he has any concerns may be absent or unclear. Response includes relevant information that will help explain the situation but does not include a significant amount of unnecessary detail.

4.5 pts

1/2 Marks

Response informs the reader of the shipment delay and the recommendation to start the Herbert Street job first, although the message may be, vague, too brief, or contain an excessive amount of unnecessary detail. Response includes some relevant information that will help explain the situation, but the information chosen may be inappropriate or inaccurately presented

2.25 pts

1/4 Marks

Response fails to inform the reader of the shipment delay and/or the recommendation to start the Herbert Street job first, or informs the reader in a general, vague, inaccurate, or confusing way.

4.0 pts

Full Marks

Organization is effective and demonstrates a logical flow of ideas within the response. • Transitions effectively connect concepts. • May contain an effective introduction and/or conclusion.

3.0 pts

3/4 Marks

• Organization is clear and appropriate. • Transitions appropriately connect concepts. • May contain an appropriate introduction and/or conclusion.

2.0 pts

1/2 Marks

• Organization is skeletal or otherwise limited, which may impede the reader’s ability to follow the response. • Some simple or basic transitions are used but may be inappropriate or ineffective. • May contain a minimal introduction and/or conclusion

1.0 pts

1/4 Marks

• Response lacks a clear plan. • Transitions are lacking or do not link ideas. • Both the introduction and conclusion are minimal and/or absent.

4.0 pts

Full Marks

Demonstrates sophistication and skill with a wide variety of conventions. • May contain minor editing errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or sentence construction. • Errors do not interfere with the reader’s understanding.

3.0 pts

3/4 Marks

• Demonstrates adequate control over a variety of conventions. • Response may contain some errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or sentence construction. • Most errors do not interfere with the reader’s understanding.

2.0 pts

1/2 Marks

• Although basic conventions may be mostly controlled, overall the response demonstrates inconsistent control over conventions. • May not use a variety of conventions, OR may only use basic conventions. • May contain a substantial number of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or sentence construction. • Some errors interfere with the reader’s understanding.

1.0 pts

1/4 Marks

• Demonstrates a lack of control over basic conventions. • May contain a large number of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, and/or sentence structure OR the errors are severe. • Errors interfere with the reader’s understanding OR the response is minimal and has a density of errors.

4.0 pts

Full Marks

• Voice is appropriately authoritative, indicating a high level of comfort with the material. • Words are precise and well-chosen. • Sentences are varied and have a natural fluidity.

3.0 pts

3/4 Marks

• Voice is appropriate and clear. • Words are appropriate to the subject matter. • Sentences are appropriate and varied, making the response easy to read

2.0 pts

1/2 Marks

• Voice may be artificial or uneven. • Word choice, overall, may be appropriate for the subject matter, but original writing may indicate a limited vocabulary range. • Sentences may be choppy, rambling, or repetitive in a way that limits fluency.

1.0 pts

1/4 Marks

• Voice may be lacking or inappropriate. • Original writing may be simplistic, vague, inappropriate, or incorrect. • Sentences may be limited in variety or may comprise awkward fragments or run-ons that produce a halting voice.

4.0 pts

Full Marks

examples, and illustrative language, response persuasively supports its conclusions. Arguments are logically sound. Facts cited are relevant and effectively support the author’s point of view. Conclusions are clear and precise.

3.0 pts

3/4 Marks

Through a combination of logic, examples, and illustrative language, response supports its conclusions. The logic behind the argument is generally sound. Facts cited are relevant and support the author’s point of view. Conclusions are clear.

2.0 pts

1/2 Marks

Through a combination of logic, examples, and illustrative language, response provides some support of its conclusions. There is evidence of logic behind the arguments, but the logic may be suspect. Response cites facts, but the relevance of these facts is not always clear and/or they do not clearly support the author’s point of view. Conclusions are often unclear.

1.0 pts

1/4 Marks

Response provides no significant justification for its conclusions. Logic, relevant facts, and conclusions are absent, inconsistent, and/or ineffective. Conclusions are unclear.