| PPMP20018 2020 T1 | Reflective 2: Reflective Report Part A |
| | Rubric |
| | | Superior
| Sufficient
| Insufficient
| Unacceptable
| Not relevant OR not attempted. | Allocated | Comments | | |
| 1. Values | Depth of reflection
(Values)
| Response demonstrates an in-depth reflection on, and personalization of, their personal values in all areas of their lives, not only those related to work or project management. The reflection indicates a deep consideration of the connection between their values and their experiences in the unit.
[2 marks] | Response demonstrates a general reflection on, and personalization of, their own values throughout their time in the unit. They have reflected on their personal values in all areas of their lives, not only those related to work or project management. There is some reflection indicating consideration of the connection between values and experiences in the unit.
[1 mark] | Response demonstrates a minimal reflection on, and personalization of, their values throughout their time in the unit. AND/OR They have mostly reflected on values related to work or project management. There is little consideration of the connection between values and experiences in the unit.
[0.5 marks] | Response demonstrates a lack of reflection on, or personalization of, their values throughout their time in the unit. AND/OR They have not reflected on their personal values, only those related to work or project management. There is no reflection or consideration of the connection between values and experiences in the unit.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there is no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| | Critical Analysis
(Values) | Response demonstrates strong critical analysis rather than simple description. Viewpoints and interpretations are insightful and well supported. Clear, detailed examples are provided, as applicable
[2 mark] | Response demonstrates reasonable critical analysis rather than simple description. Viewpoints and interpretations are supported. Appropriate examples are provided, as applicable.
[1 mark] | Response demonstrates limited critical analysis and is more descriptive in nature. Viewpoints and interpretations are unsupported or supported with flawed arguments. Examples, when applicable, are not provided or are irrelevant to the assignment.
[0.5 marks] | There is no evidence of critical analysis and the description is generalised and/or vague. Viewpoints and interpretations are missing, inappropriate, and/or unsupported. Examples, when applicable, are not provided.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| | Implication to PM
Practice and Industry readiness
(Values)
| The implications of these insights for the respondent's overall project management practice and industry readiness are thoroughly detailed and indicate an advanced understanding of the role that values play in professional careers.
[1 mark] | The implications of these insights for the respondent's overall project management practice and industry readiness are presented and indicate some understanding of the role that values play in professional careers.
[0.75 marks] | Implications of these insights for the respondent's overall project management practice or industry readiness are presented and/or indicate limited understanding of the role values play in professional careers.
[0.25 marks] | No implications for the respondent's overall project management practice or industry readiness are presented.
[0 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| Talent Triangle Competencies | Depth of reflection
(Competencies)
| Response demonstrates an in-depth reflection on and personalization of their competencies against every one of the three areas of the Talent Triangle, including the soft skill they have used in section 3. The reflection indicates a deep consideration of the connection between changes in the competencies and their experiences in the unit.
[2 marks] | Response demonstrates a general reflection on, and personalization of their competencies against every one of the three areas of the Talent Triangle, including the soft skill they have used in section 3. There is some reflection indicating consideration of the connection between changes in the competency levels and their experiences in the unit.
[1 mark] | Response demonstrates a minimal reflection on, and personalization of, of some but not every one of the three areas of the Talent Triangle including the soft skill they have used in section 3. There is little consideration of the connection between changes in the competency levels and their experiences in the unit.
[0.5 marks] | Response demonstrates a lack of reflection on the three areas of the Talent Triangle. There is no reflection or consideration of the connection between changes in the competency levels and their experiences in the unit.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there is no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| | Critical Analysis
(Competencies) | Response demonstrates strong critical analysis rather than simple description. Viewpoints and interpretations are insightful and well supported. Clear, detailed examples are provided, as applicable
[2 mark]
| Response demonstrates reasonable critical analysis rather than simple description. Viewpoints and interpretations are supported. Appropriate examples are provided, as applicable.
[1 mark]
| Response demonstrates limited critical analysis and is more descriptive in nature. Viewpoints and interpretations are unsupported or supported with flawed arguments. Examples, when applicable, are not provided or are irrelevant to the assignment.
[0.5 marks]
| There is no evidence of critical analysis and the description is generalised and/or vague. Viewpoints and interpretations are missing, inappropriate, and/or unsupported. Examples, when applicable, are not provided.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| | Implication to PM
Practice and Industry readiness
(Competencies) | The implications of these insights for the respondent's overall project management practice and industry readiness are thoroughly detailed and indicate an advanced understanding of the importance of competencies discussed in their future careers.
[1 mark] | The implications of these insights for the respondent's overall project management practice and industry readiness are presented and indicate some understanding of the importance of competencies discussed in their future careers.
[0.75 marks] | Implications of these insights for the respondent's overall project management practice or industry readiness are presented and/or indicate limited understanding of the importance of competencies discussed in their future careers.
[0.25 marks] | No implications for the respondent's overall project management practice or industry readiness are presented.
[0 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| 3.1 Hard Skill | Depth of reflection
(Hard skill)
| Response demonstrates an in-depth self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a hard skill within the unit.
[2 marks] | Response demonstrates a general self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a hard skill within the unit.
[1 mark] | Response demonstrates a minimal self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a hard skill within the unit. The reflection is more descriptive than reflective AND/OR is vague and generalised.
[0.5 marks] | Response demonstrates a lack of self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a hard skill within the unit. The response is either incomplete and/or not accurate and/or not reflective of the students participation as understood by the workshop tutor.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there is no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| | Appropriate use of STAR model
(Hard skill) | The response persuasively describes the student demonstrating a hard skill during the unit. The example discussed is clear, detailed and relevant. Each component of the STAR model is accurately interpreted and insightful.
[2 mark] | The response describes the student demonstrating a hard skill during the unit during the unit but is not necessarily persuasive. The example discussed is reasonably clear, detailed and relevant. AND/OR Three of the four components of the STAR model are accurately interpreted.
[1 mark] | The response describes the student demonstrating a hard skill during the unit, is relevant but lack clarity and detail. AND/OR Two of the four components of the STAR model are accurately interpreted.
[0.5 marks] | The response describes the student demonstrating a hard skill but it is not during the unit AND/OR the description is generalised and/or vague. AND/OR One of the four components of the STAR model are accurately interpreted.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| 3.2 Soft Skill | Depth of reflection
(Soft skill)
| Response demonstrates an in-depth self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a soft skill within the unit.
[2 marks] | Response demonstrates a general self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a soft skill within the unit.
[1 mark] | Response demonstrates a minimal self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a soft skill within the unit. The reflection is more descriptive than reflective AND/OR is vague and generalised.
[0.5 marks] | Response demonstrates a lack of self-reflection of a situation, task, action and result (STAR), where the student has demonstrated a soft skill within the unit. The response is either incomplete and/or not accurate and/or not reflective of the students participation as understood by the workshop tutor.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there is no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| | Appropriate use of STAR model
(Soft Skill) | The response persuasively describes the student demonstrating a soft skill during the unit. The example discussed is clear, detailed and relevant. Each component of the STAR model is accurately interpreted and insightful.
[2 mark] | The response describes the student demonstrating a soft skill during the unit during the unit but is not necessarily persuasive. The example discussed is reasonably clear, detailed and relevant. AND/OR Three of the four components of the STAR model are accurately interpreted.
[1 mark] | The response describes the student demonstrating a soft skill during the unit, is relevant but lack clarity and detail. AND/OR Two of the four components of the STAR model are accurately interpreted.
[0.5 marks] | The response describes the student demonstrating a soft skill but it is not during the unit AND/OR the description is generalised and/or vague. AND/OR One of the four components of the STAR model are accurately interpreted.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| Overall Quality | Quality
| Writing is clear, concise, and well organized with excellent sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a
coherent and logical manner. There are no spelling, grammar, or syntax errors.
[1 mark] | Writing is mostly clear, concise, and well organized with good sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a coherent
and logical manner. There are no more than three spelling, grammar, or syntax errors in total.
[0.75 marks] | Writing is unclear and/or disorganized. Thoughts are not expressed in a logical manner. There are more than six spelling,
grammar, or syntax errors in total.
[0.5 marks] | Writing is unclear and disorganized. Thoughts ramble and make little
sense. There are numerous (over six in total) spelling, grammar, or syntax errors.
[0.25 marks] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| Student's Self Assessment using the rubric | Self-Assessment
| The student has used this rubric correctly and completely to self-assess their report.
[1 mark] | The student has used this rubric to self-assess their report and they have correctly used the rubric for at least eight of the rows.
[0.75 marks] | The student has used this rubric to self-assess their report and they have correctly used the rubric for at least five of the rows.
[0.5 marks] | The student has used this rubric to self-assess their report and they have correctly used the rubric for at least three of the rows.
[0.25] | The response is not relevant OR there was no response provided.
[0 marks] |
| | | | | | | Total Allocated | 0 |
| | | | | | | Penalty (-5% [-1] per day ) |
| | | | | | | Marks for uploading to Moodle | 0 | | 1 |
| | Rubric adapted from (https://teachingcommons.lakeheadu.ca/sites/default/files/inline-files/reflection_rubric.pdf) |
Gopinath
Reflective2PartARubric2020t1v02.xlsx
