|
|
Excellent
|
Above Average
|
Average
|
Below Average
|
|
What is Business Level Strategy
|
Student defined business level strategy using scholarly sources. Real life examples (at least 5) of when business level strategies were applied were given. Every claim was supported with scholarly articles
|
Student defined business level strategy using scholarly sources. Real life examples (3-4) of when business level strategies were applied were given. Most claims were supported with scholarly articles
|
Student defined business level strategy using scholarly sources. Real life examples (1-2) of when business level strategies were applied were given. Some claims were supported with scholarly articles
|
Student could not define business level strategy. No real-life examples were given. No claims were supported with scholarly evidences.
|
|
Differentiate Business-Level Strategy, Functional Level Strategy, and Corporate Level Strategy
|
All the differences between functional, business, and corporate level strategies were shown. All claims were supported with scholarly evidences
|
Most of the differences between functional, business, and corporate level strategies were shown. Most claims were supported with scholarly evidences
|
Some of the differences between functional, business, and corporate level strategies were shown. Some claims were supported with scholarly evidences
|
Most of the differences between functional, business, and corporate level strategies were not shown. None of the claims were supported with scholarly evidences
|
|
How IT fits into Functional Level Strategies
|
All the ways IT fits into the functional level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were given. All Claims were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Most of the ways IT fits into the functional level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were given. Most Claims were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Some of the ways IT fits into the functional level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were given. Some Claims were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Most of the ways IT fits into the functional level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were not given. Most Claims were not supported by scholarly evidences.
|
|
How IT fits into Business Level Strategies
|
All the ways IT fits into the business level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were given. Claims were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Most of the ways IT fits into the business level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were given. Most Claims were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Some of the ways IT fits into the business level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were given. Some of the Claims were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Most of the ways IT fits into the business level strategies, as described by the authors of the article, were not given. Most Claims were not supported by scholarly evidences.
|
|
Reasons for agreeing with the authors that IT involves both functional and business level strategies
|
Five (5) or more reasons were given for agreeing with the authors. The five reasons given were backed with scholarly evidences
|
Three or four reasons were given for agreeing with the authors. The three or four reasons given were backed with scholarly evidences
|
One or two reasons were given for agreeing with the authors. The one or two reasons given were backed with scholarly evidences
|
No reasons were given for agreeing with the authors. If any reason was present, it was not supported by scholarly evidence(s)
|
|
Agreement with re-theorization of IT Strategic Nature
|
Arguments were given for re-theorization of IT strategic nature. All arguments were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Arguments were given for re-theorization of IT strategic nature. Most of the arguments were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Arguments were given for re-theorization of IT strategic nature. Some of the arguments were supported by scholarly evidences.
|
Arguments were given for re-theorization of IT strategic nature. Most of the arguments were not supported by scholarly evidences.
|
|
Author’s Theories
|
All theories propounded by the authors were identified and their elements explained. All theories were critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
Most theories propounded by the authors were identified and their elements explained. Most theories were critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
Some theories propounded by the authors were identified and their elements explained. Some theories were critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
Most theories propounded by the authors were not identified and their elements were not explained. Most theories were not critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
|
Critique of Assumptions
|
All assumptions made by the authors were critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
Most assumptions made by the authors were critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
Some assumptions made by the authors were critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
Most assumptions made by the authors were not critiqued using scholarly evidences.
|
|
Grammar
|
There were no grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors
|
There were few grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors
|
There were some grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors
|
There were numerous grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors
|
|
APA
|
The examination was written in the APA style with no mistakes
|
The examination was written in the APA style with few mistakes
|
The examination was written in the APA style with some mistakes
|
The APA style was ignored; there were numerous mistakes
|
ravipatel9090
MidTermExamRubricLSu2018.docx
0
