Business Information Systems

3 to >2.4 Pts

High Distinction

Excellent presentation. Table of contents has been automatically generated and other instructions concerning the presentation of the report fully adhered to.

2.4 to >2.1 Pts

Distinction

Very good presentation overall, minor formatting or presentation issues eg. Page numbering, paragraphing

2.1 to >1.8 Pts

Credit

Presentation is good overall but there are several presentation errors/and or formatting problems (eg: missing page numbers and/or missing headers/footers or table of contents not automatically generated)

1.8 to >1.5 Pts

Pass

Presentation meets the requirements to pass but there are consistent or multiple formatting issues.

1.5 to >0 Pts

Fail

Formatting is poor. Guidelines have clearly not been followed (or no table of contents)

2 to >1.6 Pts

High Distinction

The introduction is concise, provides the reader with a clear framework for reading the rest of the report.

1.6 to >1.4 Pts

Distinction

The introduction is very good but either needs a little more detail to be complete or includes some unnecessary or irrelevant details.

1.4 to >1.2 Pts

Credit

The introduction to the report is good overall but there is scope for greater clarity of expression or focus. Some details missing

1.2 to >1.0 Pts

Pass

Introduction has been attempted but is generally irrelevant and/or purpose statement is missing.

1 to >0 Pts

Fail

The introduction is missing or fails to explain the purpose of writing the report

4 to >3.2 Pts

High Distinction

A comprehensive analysis and use of %, proportions etc that ensure the data is described in the appropriate context. A Comprehensive discussion regarding the options for change in operations and more complex issues identified

3.2 to >2.8 Pts

Distinction

Very Good development/analysis of appropriate content areas but missing some necessary/appropriate content or analysis. Has attempted to discuss options for appropriate variables and other issues for the business are identified

2.8 to >2.4 Pts

Credit

Good analysis but too descriptive, further minimal meaningful supporting evidence would have enhanced the analysis Only 1 or 2 of the relevant variables discussed

2.4 to >2.0 Pts

Pass

Satisfactory analysis that addresses the required variables adequately. Lacks supporting evidence.

2 to >0 Pts

Fail

Unacceptable or no analysis. Fails to address required variables adequately. Lacks supporting evidence.

4 to >3.2 Pts

High Distinction

An excellent discussion fully evidencing the interpretation of the analysis of the improvement for the variable/s identified, quantified the change.

3.2 to >2.8 Pts

Distinction

A very good discussion about the interpretation of the results and implications for the future (re change in operation)

2.8 to >2.4 Pts

Credit

Good discussion regarding results of the analysis of the improvement initiative and its effectiveness but interpretation could have been more detailed to include more variables and/or evidence

2.4 to >2.0 Pts

Pass

Satisfactory discussion regarding results of the analysis of the improvement initiative and its effectiveness but interpretation could have been signifcantly more detailed to include more variables and/or evidence

2 to >0 Pts

Fail

Minimal or no discussion regarding interpretation of the analysis of the improvement initiative and its effectiveness.

5 to >4.0 Pts

High Distinction

The potential effects to the business which would result from the proposed improvements have been clearly identified and discussed (both in terms of other factors and quantified result)

4 to >3.5 Pts

Distinction

A very good attempt to discuss the potential effects to the business which would result from the proposed improvements (both in terms of other factors and quantified result)

3.5 to >3.0 Pts

Credit

A good attempt to discuss the potential effects to the business which would result from the suggested change to the proposed improvements, but discussion needs to be clearer, or be expanded to include both figures and other relevant implications.

3 to >2.5 Pts

Pass

A satisfactory attempt to discuss the potential effects to the business which would result from the suggested change to the proposed improvements, but discussion needs to be significantly clearer, or be expanded to include both figures and other relevant implications.

2.5 to >0 Pts

Fail

Minimal or no attempt to identify or discuss the potential effects to the business resulting from the suggested changes

3 to >2.4 Pts

High Distinction

Excellent use of supporting evidence (charts/tables) Appropriately labelled, referred to in text or as an appendix. Clearly adds to audience’s understanding. Screen shots of relevant calculations have been displayed appropriately in appendix.

2.4 to >2.1 Pts

Distinction

Very good use of supporting evidence (charts/tables) but minor errors in set out, explanation or labelling. Screen shots of calculations have been included in appendix

2.1 to >1.8 Pts

Credit

Good use of supporting evidence (charts/tables) but several errors in set out, explanation or labelling. Screen shots of calculations have been included in appendix

1.8 to >1.5 Pts

Pass

Supporting evidence is present (charts/tables) with a reasonable connection to the content in the report. Choice of chart could be improved. Not referred to appropriately within the text, or poorly displayed, Some screen shots of calculations have been included in the report

1.5 to >0 Pts

Fail

Supporting evidence have major flaws and/or are missing from the report. Screen shots are not included

3 to >2.4 Pts

High Distinction

An excellent conclusion that restates the main findings of the analysis. Conclusion is accurate and relevant and data has been used to support your findings.

2.4 to >2.1 Pts

Distinction

A very good attempt to draw conclusions from the analysis, could have been enhanced with more depth and/or supporting data.

2.1 to >1.8 Pts

Credit

A good attempt to draw conclusions from the analysis but limited depth and/or supporting data.

1.8 to >1.5 Pts

Pass

A satisfactory attempt to draw conclusions from the data. However, the conclusion is either incomplete, contains irrelevant material or is inaccurate.

1.5 to >0 Pts

Fail

No or very limited attempt to draw conclusions from the analysis.

3 to >2.4 Pts

High Distinction

Excellent, clear and actionable recommendations which enable the client to select determine which strategies will be profitable in the future. Evidence demonstrates clear logic and is consistent with the content of the rest of the report.

2.4 to >2.1 Pts

Distinction

Very good recommendations that are drawn from the analysis, but some scope to further enhance clarity or consistency with rest of the report

2.1 to >1.8 Pts

Credit

Good recommendations that are drawn from the analysis, but the reader has to make some assumptions to action them.

1.8 to >1.5 Pts

Pass

Satisfactory recommendations but at least one of the recommendations does not flow clearly and logically from the body of the paper. Some recommendations may not be actionable

1.5 to >0 Pts

Fail

Recommendations are either not included or are not linked to problem(s) or opportunity(ies).

1.5 to >1.2 Pts

High Distinction

The logical flow of ideas is excellent and length of each section/paragraph is appropriate. Descriptive subheadings provide a clear outline to the report.

1.2 to >1.05 Pts

Distinction

Very good flow of ideas and use of subheadings which provide an outline to the report.

1.05 to >0.9 Pts

Credit

Generally good flow of ideas and use of subheadings which provide an outline to the report. Some subheadings may be missing, minimal or inappropriately labelled. Word count should be adhered to.

0.9 to >0.75 Pts

Pass

Satisfactory structure but Ideas do not always flow logically. Some subheadings are missing, minimal or inappropriately labelled.Word count should be adhered to.

0.75 to >0 Pts

Fail

Structure of the report does not follow a logical sequence.

1.5 to >1.2 Pts

High Distinction

Sentences flow well. Ideas are clearly and logically expressed and developed. Writing is error free or nearly error free.

1.2 to >1.05 Pts

Distinction

Occasional problems with spelling/grammar/English Expression/sentence structure or flow of ideas but these do not detract from the message

1.05 to >0.9 Pts

Credit

Some problems with spelling/grammar/English Expression/sentence structure or flow of ideas but these do not detract from the message

0.9 to >0.75 Pts

Pass

Satisfactory language but writing contains numerous and/or significant errors which detract from the message and make the arguments difficult to follow.

0.75 to >0 Pts

Fail

English expression/sentence structure and grammar is very poor and seriously detracts from the quality of your work. You should seek assistance regarding this issue.