logistics ii

Learning Descriptors

Fail Below 60%

Marginal Fail 60-69%

Fair 70-79 %

Good 80-89%

Exceptional 90-100%

Purpose & Understanding

KNOWLEDGE & UNDERSTANDING

10%

Very poor coverage of central purpose, goals, research questions or arguments with little relevant information evident. Virtually no evidence of understanding or focus.

Minimal understanding of purpose of the study; factual errors evident. Gaps in knowledge and superficial understanding. A few lines of relevant material.

Reasonable understanding and clearly identifies the purpose, goals, research questions or argument.

Reflect partial achievement of learning outcomes.

A sound grasp of, and clearly identifies, the purpose, goals, research questions or argument. Some wider study beyond the classroom content shown.

Effectively describes and explains the central purpose, arguments, research questions, or goals of the project; explana-tion is focused, detailed and compe-lling. Recognition of alternative forms of evidence beyond that supplied in the classroom.

Content

KNOWLEDGE & UNDERSTANDING

20%

Content is unclear, inaccurate and/or incomplete. Brief and irrelevant.Descriptive Only personal views offered. Unsubs-tantiated and does not support the purpose, argument or goals of the project. Reader gains no insight through the content of the project.

Limited content that does not really support the purpose of the report. Very poor coverage.

Displays only rudimentary knowledge of the content area. Reader gains few if any insights

Presents some information that adequately supports the central purpose, arguments, goals, or research questions of the project. Although parts missing, it demonstrates a level of partially proficient knowledge of the content area. Reader gains some insights.

Presents clear and appropriate information that adequately supports the central purpose, arguments, goals or research questions of the project.

Demonstrates satisfactory knowledge of the content area. Reader gains proficient insights.

Presents balanced, significant and valid information that clearly and convin-cingly supports the central purpose, arguments, research questions or goals of the project. Demons-trates in-depth and specialized knowledge of the content area. The reader gains important insights.

Organization

COMMUNICATION

5%

Information/content is not logically organized or presented. Topics/ paragraphs are frequently disjointed and fail to make sense together. Reader cannot identify a line of reasoning and loses interest.

Information/content is not, at times, logically organized or presented. Topics/paragraphs are frequently disjointed which makes the content hard to follow. The reader finds it hard to understand the flow of the report.

Information/content is presented in a reasonable sequen-ce. Topic /paragraph transition is unclear in places with linkages for the most part. Reader can generally understand and follow the line of reasoning, although work needed to be proficiently organized.

Information/content is presented in a clear and understandable sequence. Topic/ paragraph transition is good with clear linkages between sections and arguments. Reader can understand and follow the line of reasoning.

Information/content is presented in a logical, interesting and effective sequence. Topics and arguments flow smoothly and cohe-rently from one to another and are clearly linked. Reader can easily follow the line of reasoning and enjoyed reading the report.

Style & Tone

COMMUNICATION

5%

Writing is poor, unclear and unen-gaging, and the reader finds it difficult to read and maintain interest. Tone is not profes-sional or suitable for an academic research project. A reorganization and rewrite is needed.

Writing is unengaging and reader finds it difficult to maintain interest. Tone is not consistently professional or suitable for an academic research project. Work needed on academic writing style.

Writing is usually engaging and keeps the reader’s attention. Tone is generally appropriate for an academic research project, although a clearer and more professional style and tone is needed.

Writing style and tone is generally good and sustains interest throughout. Tone is professional and appropriate for an academic research project.

Writing is compelling and sustains interest throughout. Tone is consistently professional and appropriate for an academic research project.

Use of References

COMMUNICATION

5%

Little or no evidence of reference sources in the report. Content not supported and based on unsubstantiated views.

Most references are from sources that are not peer-reviewed or professional, and have uncertain reliability. Few if any appropriate citations are provided. Reader doubts the validity of much of the material.

Professionally legitimate references are generally used. Fair citations are presented in most cases. Some of the information/content/evidence comes from sources that are re-liable, but more academic sources needed to be convincing.

Professionally and academically legitimate references are used. Clear and accurate citations are presented in most cases. The majority of the information/content/evidence comes from sources that are reliable.

Presents compelling evidence from pro-fessionally and aca-demically legitimate sources. Attribution is clear and accurate. References are 75% from primarily peer-reviewed profes-sional journals or other approved sources.

Formatting

COMMUNICATION

5%

Research project exhibits no formatting, or frequent and significant errors in Harvard formatting.

There are too many errors in the Harvard formatting to be acceptable as a partially proficient piece.

Harvard formatting is employed in the research project with minor errors. A review and rework of format and style of referencing in text and in the bibliography is needed.

Harvard formatting is used accurately and consistently throughout the research project, although some issues are apparent as the reader is unable to find sources.

Harvard formatting is used accurately and consistently throughout the research project. Accurate hyperlinks are included where required, making it easy for readers to review sources.

Written Communication Skills

COMMUNICATION

5%

The written project exhibits multiple errors in grammar, sentence structure and/or spelling. Ina-dequate writing skills (e.g., weaknesses in language facility and mechanics) hinder readability and con-tribute to an ineffec-tive research project.

The written project exhibits errors in grammar, punctua-tion and spelling. The written project co-mes across as untidy and not properly checked for mista-kes. Errors present in written communi-cation make reada-bility frustrating.

Written research project displays good word choice, langua-ge conventions and mechanics with a few minor errors in spelling, grammar, sentence structure and/or punctuation. Errors do not represent a major distraction or obscure meaning.

Readability of the project is good due to the clarity of language used. Grammar, spelling and punctuation is without error.

Spelling and grammar thoroughly checked.

Readability of the project is enhanced by facility in language use/wordchoice. Excellent mechanics and syntactic variety. Uses language con-ventions effectively (e.g., spelling, punc-tuation, sentence structure, paragraphing, grammar, etc.).

Oral Communication Skills

COMMUNICATION

Oral presentation cannot be understood because there is no logical sequencing of research information. Presenter uses superfluous graphics or no graphics; graphics do not support or relate to the information presented. Presenter reads mostor all of the project notes with little or no eye contact. Presenter mumbles, incorrectly pronounces terms and/or speaks too quietly.Oral presentation rambles, is unclear and cannot be followed by the audience. Presenter is unprofessional, lacks confidence, is uncomfortable and cannot answer basic questions.

Research information is presented in a sequence that at times is difficult to follow.

Graphics support and are related to the content of the project, but presenter reads from slides and does not talk around the topic.Presenter tries to maintains eye contact with the audience but reads from notes too much. Presenter uses good voice dynamics and clearly enunciates terms, however they are uncomfortable for the most part and finds it hard answering questions. Overall, the oral presentation is delivered in a borderline manner and needs more practice and preparation to reach required standards of delivery.

Research information is presented in a sequence that the audience can follow. Graphics support are related to the content of the project. Presenter maintains eye contact with the audience with a few minor exceptions; presenter reads from notes on a few occasions. Presenter uses good voice dynamics and clearly enunciates terms. Presenter is comfortable for the most part and adequately answers questions.

Overall, the oral presentation is delivered in a satisfactory manner and meets expectations with respect to oral communication skills.

Research information is presented in a sequence that the audience can follow. Graphic ssupport and are related to the content of the project. Presenter maintains eye contact with the audience with a few minor exceptions, seldom returning to notes. Presenter uses good voice dynamics and clearly enunciates terms. Presenter is comfortable and answers questions well.

Overall, the oral presentation is delivered in a good manner and meets expectations with respect to oral communication skills.

Research information is presented in a logical, interesting and effective sequence, which the audience can easily follow. Oral presentation uses effective graphics to explain and reinforce the information presented. Presenter maintains eye contact with audience and does not read from notes. Presenter speaks in a clear voice and uses correct, precise pronunciation of terms. Oral presentation is thorough, clear, compelling, informative and professionally delivered. Presenter is professional, confident and comfortable, and answers questions effectively.

Analytical / Critical Thinking Skills

CRITICAL THINKING

25%

Research problem, concept or idea is not clearly articulated, or its component elements are not identified or described. Research information is poorly organized, categorized and/or not examined; research information is often inaccurate or incomplete. Presents little if any analysis or interpretation; inaccurately and/or inappropriately applies research methods, techniques , models,frameworks and/or theories to the analysis. Presents few solutions or conclusions;solutionsor conclusions are often not well supported, are inaccurate and/or inconsistent, and are presented in a vague or rudimentary manner.

Research problem, concept or idea is not clearly articulated at times and confusing. Research information is badly organized, categorized, and/or only superficially examined; research information is often incomplete. Presents limited analysis or interpretation; inaccurately and/or inappropriately applies research methods, techniques, models, frameworks and/or theories to the analysis. Presents some solutions or conclusions but they are often not wellsupported, or logical.

Adequately identifies and describes (or sketches out) the research problem, concept or idea and its components. Gathers and examines information relating to the research problem, concept or idea; presents and appraises research information with some minor inconsistencies, irrelevancies or omissions. Generally applies appropriate research methods, techniques, models, frameworks and/or theories although within accuracies. Outlines solutions or conclusions that are somewhat logical and consistent with the analysis and evidence; identifies and/or lists solutions or conclusions although not always clearly.

Formulates a clear description of the research problem, concept or idea, and specifies major elements to be examined. Selects information appropriate to addressing the research problem, concept or idea; accurately and appropriately analyses and interprets relevant research information. Effectively applies appropriate research methods, techniques, models, frameworks and/or theories in developing and justifying multiple solutions or conclusions; solutions or conclusions are coherent, well supported and complete.

Effectively formula-tes a cleardescription of the research pro-blem,concept oridea, and specifies major elements to be examined. Selects and prioritizes infor-mation appropriate to addressing the research problem, concept, or idea; accurately and ap-propriately analyzes and interprets relevant research information.Precisely and effectively applies appropriate research methods, employs advanced skills to conduct research. Uses techniques, models, frameworks and/or theories in develop-ping and justifying multiple solutions or conclusions; solu-tions or conclusions are insightful, coherent, well supported, logically consistent and complete. Displays a mastery of complex and specialized areas

Integration Skills

APPLICATION & EVALUATION

20%

Shows little ability to employ theory and practice across the functional areas of business in the assessment of issues relating to the research problem, concept, or idea. Does not recognize or correctly identify cross-functional organizational issues relevant to the researchproblem, concept or idea. Does not adequately evaluate the research problem, concept or idea in light of relevant principles, theories and practices across the business functional areas. Few if any solutions, recommendations for action, or conclusions are presented, and/or they are not appropriately justified or supported.

Shows some ability to employ theory and practice across the functional areas of business in the assessment of issues relating to the research problem, concept or idea. Recognizes organizational issues relevant to the research problem, concept or idea but does not show understanding. Does not adequately evaluate the research problem, concept or idea in light of relevant principles, theories and practices across the business functional areas. Some solutions offered but difficult to understand. Recommendations for action, or conclusions are presented, but they are often not well supported, or logical.

Exhibits application of principles,theories and practices across the functional areas of business to the analysis of the research problem, concept or idea. With some exceptions, outlines and describes (or sketches out) some cross- functional organizational issues that are relevant to the research problem, concept or idea.

Adequately identifies and describes (or summarizes) solutions, recommendations for action, or conclusions that are, for the mostpart, appropriate, but which needto be more aligned with principles and concepts in the functional areas of business.

Demonstrates an ability to integrate and apply principles, theories and practices across the functional areas of business tothe analysis of the research problem, concept or idea.

Identifies, examines and critically evaluates important cross-functional organizational issues associated with the research problem, concept or idea. Clearly justifies solutions, recommendations for action, or conclusions based on analytics and an insightful synthesis ofcross-disciplinary principles andconcepts in the functional areas of business.

Demonstrates well-developed ability to integrate and apply principles,theories and practices across the functional areas of business to theanalysis of the research problem, concept or idea. Effectively identifies, examines and critically evaluates important cross-functional organiza-tional issues asso-ciated with the research problem, concept, or idea. Clearly and effect-tively justifies solu-tions, recommend-dations for action, or conclusions based on strong analytics and an insightful synthe-sis of cross-disciplinary principles and concepts in the functional areas of business. Can link thinking across disciplines and contexts.