case study

Case Study Rubric

  Criterion

Strong

Average

Weak

Introduction / Primary Problem, Issue or Question Identification

States the case objective and clearly defines the problem, issue or question

Minimally describes the case, includes only the problem, issue or question

Bypasses the introduction and moves directly to commentary on the case

Understanding of Primary Problem, Issue or Question

Identifies and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the primary issues and or problems in the case study

Identifies and demonstrates an accomplished understanding of most of the issues/problems

Identifies and demonstrates acceptable understanding of some of the issues/problems in the case study

Analysis and Evaluation of Issues/Problems

Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all identified problems, issues or questions; includes all necessary calculations

Presents a thorough analysis of most of the problems, issues or questions identified; missing some necessary calculations

Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis of some of the identified problems, issues or questions; omits necessary calculations  

Recommendations on Effective Solutions/Strategies

Supports diagnosis and opinions with convincing arguments and evidence; presents a balanced and critical view; interpretation is both reasonable and objective . Recommendations logically supported

Supports diagnosis and opinions with limited reasoning and evidence; presents a one‐sided argument; demonstrates little engagement with ideas presented. Illogical recommendations

Little or no action suggested, and/or ineffective or disconnected solutions proposed to the issues in the case study. No attempt at logical support for recommendations

Links to Course Readings and Additional Research

Makes appropriate and powerful connections between identified issues/problems and the strategic concepts studied in the course readings and lectures; supplements case study with relevant and thoughtful research and identifies all sources of information

Makes appropriate but vague connections between identified issues/problems and concepts studied in readings and lectures; demonstrates limited command of the analytical tools studied; supplements case study with limited sources

Makes ineffective connections or shows no connection between issues identified and the concepts studied in the readings; supplements case study, if at all, with incomplete information and sources

Writing Mechanics and Formatting Guidelines

Demonstrates a clear understanding of the audience for the case. Utilizes formatting, clarity and structure to enable the audience to readily see and understand recommended actions. Writing is logical, grammatically correct, spelling is error free

Demonstrates a limited understanding of the audience for the case. Ineffective structuring of response making it difficult to readily see and understand recommended actions. Writing shows poor logic, grammatical and spelling flaws, though still a clear presentation of ideas

Demonstrates a lack of understanding of the audience for the case. Lack of structuring of response making the audience work to find and understand recommended actions. Grammatical and spelling flaws are obstacles to acceptance of the recommendation. Writing illogical and unfocused, and does not follow specified guidelines