| Criteria | Excellent | Good | Developing | Needs Improvement | Failing |
| Complete ABC Assessment | 3 points
Specific identification and evaluation of all ABC assessment elements were applied using insightfully surmised conclusions drawn from and supported by ideas from the class material and case study facts.
(2.7-3.0) | 2.5 points
Specific identification and evaluation of most ABC assessment elements were applied and surmised conclusions were drawn from and supported by ideas from the class material and case study facts. 1-2 elements were underdeveloped in the discussion.
(2.4 - 2.59) | 2.25 points
Specific identification and evaluation of most ABC assessment elements were applied. Most conclusions were drawn from and supported by ideas from the class material and case study facts. Discussion was not specific enough and elements while addressed were underdeveloped.
(2.1-2.39) | 1.95 points
An attempt was made to apply an ABC assessment but only two or fewer factors were discussed; evaluation of importance was absent or minimally discussed.
(1.8 - 2.09) | 0 points
No assessment was presented or the elements were listed but not applied in any detailed fashion.
(0- 1.79 |
| ABC explanation of how assessment was created | 2 points
Discussion of the how the ABC assessment was created is insightful and analysis is logically concluded while being supported from the facts of the case study and class material.
(1.8-2.0) | 1.7 points
Discussion of the how the ABC assessment was created is thorough and analysis is mostly logically concluded while being supported from the facts of the case study and class material. There was 1-2 areas of the discussion that lacked detailed support from the material or case facts.
(1.6- 1.79)
| 1.5 points
Discussion of the how the ABC assessment was created is satisfactory and analysis is fir the most part logically concluded .While some support from the facts of the case study and class material was present, it lacked detail or was vague as to the logic behind the conclusions. .
(1.4 -1.59) | 1.3 points
An attempt was made to discuss the logic and material used to create the ABC assessment. Either the attempt was incomplete in its application of the elements or the discussion minimally discussed the logic or material support for the application process and lacked detail.
(1.2 - 1.39) | 0 points
No discussion of how the assessment was created was made and or the attempt made was minimal and the discussion was without support from the material or facts.
(0- 1.19) |
| ABC recommendations and explanation/conclusions | 2 points
4 or more ABC recommendations were made; the discussion of the logical reasoning behind the recommendations was insightful and strongly supported by both the case study facts and the class material.
(1.8 - 2) | 1.7 points
Three ABC recommendations were made; the discussion of the logical reasoning behind the recommendations was good and strongly supported by both the case study facts and the class material with the exception of one recommendation which was underdeveloped.
(1.6-1.79) | 1.5 points
Three ABC recommendations were made; the discussion of the logical reasoning behind the recommendations was satisfactory and adequately supported by both the case study facts and the class material but in general there were areas that were underdeveloped due to lack of detail.
(1.4-1.59) | 1.3 points
An attempt was made to make recommendations but either the recommendations made were missing discussion of how the conclusions were made and/or the requisite number of three was not met. Discuss the was not supported with both case study facts or class material.
(1.2 - 1.39) | 0 points
No attempt was made to make recommendations or only a list was mentioned with no explanation.
(0-1.19) |
| EOQ costs to get & keep inventory | 2 points
Both EOQ cost numbers for obtaining and keeping the inventory were made accurately an completely.
(1.8 - 2.0) | 1.7 points
Both EOQ cost numbers for obtaining and keeping the inventory were made accurately with one mistake.
(1.6 - 1.79) | 1.5 points
Both EOQ cost numbers for obtaining and keeping the inventory were made accurately with two mistakes.
(1.4 - 1.59) | 1.3 points
Either EOQ cost numbers were submitted for obtaining inventory or keeping inventory but not both; or both were attempted but the errors in application were too significant to be able to draw accurate conclusions.
(1.2 - 1.39)
| 0 points
Neither was attempted or the attempt discussed what to do but failed to create specific data.
(0-1.19) |
| Why and How EOQ costs will affect recommendations | 3 points
Explanation of how the EOQ costs will effect the recommendations made for inventory planning was logically reasoned and comprehensively discussed by using ideas obtained through course material; discussion showed an insightful understanding of how handling EOQ cost effects planning.
(2.7 - 3.0) | 2.5 points
Explanation of how the EOQ costs will effect the recommendations made for inventory planning was logically reasoned by using ideas obtained through course material; discussion showed a sound understanding of how handling EOQ cost effects planning but one or two areas lacked detail.
(2.4 - 2.69) | 2.25 points
A general explanation of the effect the EOQ costs will have on recommendations made for inventory planning was given; most of the discussion was logically reasoned by using ideas obtained through course material however the discussion was not detailed enough.
(2.1 - 2.39) | 1.95 points
An attempt was made to discuss the effects between EOQ costs and inventory recommendations was made but the discussion was very weak due to a lack of logical connections made from class material and case study facts.
(1.8-2.09) | 0 points
No discussion of the relationship was made and or it was minimal.
(0- 1.79) |
| Change Recommendations to inventory decisions | 3 points
More than 3 inventory planning change suggestions were given. Discussion of the reasoning that led to the suggestion was comprehensive and insightful. Conclusions were drawn and supported by use of the case facts and course material.
(2.7 - 3) | 2.5 points
3 inventory planning change suggestions were given. Discussion of the reasoning that led to the suggestion was thorough with one suggestion being underdeveloped. Most conclusions were drawn and supported by use of the case facts and course material.
(2.4 - 2.69) | 2.25 points
3 inventory planning change suggestions were given. Discussion of the reasoning that led to the suggestion was general with most suggestions being underdeveloped. Conclusions were drawn and satisfactorily supported by use of the case facts and course material. More detail was needed.
(2.1-2.39) | 1.95 points
1-2 inventory planning change suggestions were given. Discussion of the reasoning that led to the suggestion was significantly underdeveloped. Conclusions were drawn but were not or minimally supported by use of the case facts and course material.
(1.8-2.09) | 0 points
No suggestions were given and or they were not made or minimal with no support given to the changes suggested.
(0-1.79) |
| Attention to Instructions | 2 points
The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper also includes completion of all minor aspects of the assignment such as table creation if required, third person writing, required use of course material, outside sources if needed, inclusion of page and paragraph number, no use of books, assignment format and avoidance of using direct quotes.
(1.8-2.0) | 1.7 points
The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper missed one minor aspects of the assignment such as table creation if required, third person writing, required use of course material, outside sources if needed, inclusion of page and paragraph number, no use of books, assignment format and avoidance of using direct quotes.
(1.6 - 1.79) | 1.5 points
One major assignment tasks or two minor aspects of the assignment missed such as table creation if required, third person writing, required use of course material, outside sources if needed, inclusion of page and paragraph number, no use of books, assignment format and avoidance of using direct quotes.
(1.4 - 1.59) | 1.3 points
Two major assignment tasks and/or three minor aspects of the assignments missed as table creation if required, third person writing, required use of course material, outside sources if needed, inclusion of page and paragraph number, no use of books, assignment format and avoidance of using direct quotes.
(1.2 - 1.39) | 0 points
Three or more major assignment tasks missed or more than three minor aspects of the assignment missed such as table creation if required, third person writing, required use of course material, outside sources if needed, inclusion of page and paragraph number, no use of books, assignment format and avoidance of using direct quotes.
(0-1.19) |
| Writing Mechanics | 2 points
Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English using paragraphs and sentence rather than bullets, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No contractions or jargon used. Zero to two errors noted.
(1.8-2.0) | 1.7 points
Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Three to six errors noted.
(1.6 - 1.79) | 1.5 points
Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Seven to 10 errors noted.
(1.4 - 1.59) | 1.3 points
Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.
(1.2 - 1.39) | 0 points
Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.
(0 - 1.19) |
| APA Style (6th ed.) | 1 point
One to 2 APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.
(0.9-1.0) | 0.85 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference list but 3 - 4 APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.
(0.8 - 0.89) | 0.75 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document with 5-6 errors noted; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 - 4 times in document.
(0.7 - 0.79) | 0.65 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 5-6 times; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 5-6 times in document or presents a total of 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper when requires APA citations are needed throughout the document.
(0.6 - 0.69) | 0 points
No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.
(0-0.64) |
Tggri2147
InventoryManagementAssessmentRubric.xlsx
