Marketing case study
ravipuli
Reportgradingrubericword.docx|
Criteria |
Question |
Weight |
Missing |
Very Basic |
Adequate |
Done well |
|
|
|
|
0.00 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
3.00 |
|
Theory |
1 |
10% |
Theory lacks clarity or it does not apply to the question asked |
Appropriate theory identified, however explanation lacks depth |
Appropriate theory selected and explained at a good level |
Theory appropriate, clearly explained and used in a an insightful way |
|
Context |
1 |
10% |
No or irrelevant contextual information |
Some appropriate contextual information used |
Contextual information is relevant and well selected |
Contextual information is relevant and insightful |
|
Style |
1 |
10% |
Presence of multiple grammatical or spelling errors, poor referencing and answers lack clarity |
Some grammatical and/or spelling errors, referencing needs improvement, and /or answer lacks clarity |
Generally good flow with few spelling and/or grammatical errors, referencing generally sound, writing clear |
Answers Flow, written work is concise and clear referencing appropriate |
|
Theory |
2 |
10% |
Theory lacks clarity or it does not apply to the question asked |
Appropriate theory identified, however explanation lacks depth |
Appropriate theory selected and explained at a good level |
Theory appropriate, clearly explained and used in a an insightful way |
|
Context |
2 |
10% |
No or irrelevant contextual information |
Some appropriate contextual information used |
Contextual information is relevant and well selected |
Contextual information is relevant and insightful |
|
Style |
2 |
10% |
Presence of multiple grammatical or spelling errors, poor referencing and answers lack clarity |
Some grammatical and/or spelling errors, referencing needs improvement, and /or answer lacks clarity |
Generally good flow with few spelling and/or grammatical errors, referencing generally sound, writing clear |
Answers Flow, written work is concise and clear referencing appropriate |
|
Theory |
3 |
10% |
Theory lacks clarity or it does not apply to the question asked |
Appropriate theory identified, however explanation lacks depth |
Appropriate theory selected and explained at a good level |
Theory appropriate, clearly explained and used in a an insightful way |
|
Context |
3 |
10% |
No or irrelevant contextual information |
Some appropriate contextual information used |
Contextual information is relevant and well selected |
Contextual information is relevant and insightful |
|
Style |
3 |
10% |
Presence of multiple grammatical or spelling errors, poor referencing and answers lack clarity |
Some grammatical and/or spelling errors, referencing needs improvement, and /or answer lacks clarity |
Generally good flow with few spelling and/or grammatical errors, referencing generally sound, writing clear |
Answers Flow, written work is concise and clear referencing appropriate |
|
Coherence |
ALL |
|
Coherence across the questions lacking |
basic coherence across the three questions |
Generally good coherence across the three questions |
Questions build to present a coherent whole |
