brilliant answers only
Rubric – MGMT747 – Week 5 – Financial and Reporting Aspects Paper
|
Grade RANGE
|
Score Earned |
OVERALL Comment |
CONTENT 70% Introduction, area of sustainability performance reporting that incorporates financial metrics, explanation of metrics used and their importance in reporting SBD progress to stakeholders, example provided, 3 credible publications to support the information (1 peer reviewed), summative commentary. |
STRUCTURE 15% |
MECHANICS 10% |
APA FORMAT 5% |
|
A/A- |
|
Writing that excels in most areas. Superior work. |
Analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of material are obvious and substantial. Material is genuinely thought-provoking. Addresses all required content elements. |
Excellent control of language, clear consideration of audience. Sentence and paragraph variety appropriate for audience. Written at the graduate level. |
Grammar and punctuation issues are addressed correctly. Editing and proofreading are evident. |
Complete; correct documentation, appropriate headings/sub-headings, integration of citations and paraphrases. No evidence of plagiarism. |
|
B+ |
|
Very good writing which lacks the fluency and complexity of the A paper. Above average work. |
Few errors in logic though some minor weaknesses can be spotted. May be a thinner version of an A paper. Addresses all required content elements. |
Good consideration of audience. Paragraphing structure is strong. Most of the writing is cohesively strong. Written at the graduate level. |
One grammatical error. Editing and proofreading are evident. |
A little over reliance on source material. Lack of original thought. Few formatting errors, yet the message is clear. |
|
B |
|
Good writing that maintains competencies in most areas. Average work. |
Adequate analysis and evaluation of analytical thinking. Addresses all required content elements. |
Some weaknesses in audience identification. Paragraph structure needs improvement. Written at the graduate level. |
Two- three grammatical errors but not distracting to the reader. |
Clumsy inclusion of sources. Too many direct quotes. Few formatting errors that distract from the message. |
|
B- |
|
Fair writing that maintains competencies in most areas. Below average work. |
Gaps in evidence and insufficient links. Little evidence of analytical thinking. Missing one or two content elements. |
Definite weaknesses in reader identification. Sentences may be somewhat poorly constructed, and word choice may be inappropriate at times. |
A variety of grammatical mistakes. A pattern of errors that distracts the reader. |
Use of un-cited paraphrasing. Numerous errors that distract from the message. |
|
C+/C |
|
Fair writing that maintains competencies in some areas. Passing work. |
Lacks evidence of analytical or evaluative thinking. Several content elements missing. |
Inaccurate word choice, fragmented and monotonous sentences and little or no concern for the reader. |
Problems include repeated grammar and usage errors distracting to the reader. |
Some sources incorrectly cited or not used. Reference page may not correlate to the texts. Numerous formatting errors that distract from the message. |
|
F |
|
Unacceptable writing; does not meet standards of the assignment. Failing work. |
Thinking presented is chaotic, or it is missing completely. Missing critical content elements. |
The writing lacks organization and cohesion at all levels. Impossible for the reader to follow. |
Generally has a grammar and/or usage problem in almost every sentence. |
Sources are not used or are used incorrectly. Reference page may be missing. Numerous formatting errors that distract from the message. |
Novakowski 2012/McCormick 2013