International Financial Management report

Criteria

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Presentation: (20%)

Referencing: sources of information and data are referenced according to accepted academic convention.

Grammar and spelling

All sources are referenced according to accepted international academic convention.

No spelling and/or grammatical mistakes.

All important sources are referenced and only a small number of other sources are not referenced, or not referenced according to accepted international academic convention.

Minor spelling and/or grammatical mistakes.

All important sources are referenced, but a large number of other sources are not referenced or not referenced according to accepted international academic convention.

Some obvious but inconsequential spelling and/or grammatical mistakes.

Most important sources are referenced, but a majority of other sources are not referenced or not referenced according to accepted international academic convention.

Numerous spelling and/or grammatical mistakes of consequence, but they do not pose an insurmountable challenge for the reader.

Significant majority of sources, including the most important, are not referenced, or not referenced in accordance to accepted international academic convention.

Contains numerous spelling and/or grammatical errors that pose an insurmountable challenge for the reader.

Research: (40%)

Concepts/theories and ideas have been identified and explained or interpreted.

Depth and width of research (including empirical research, if required).

Key concepts and ideas are identified. Explanations or interpretations demonstrate sophisticated understanding. Demonstrates serious engagement with challenging material from an extensive variety of sources.

Demonstrates exceptional and enterprising effort to gather empirical data from an extensive variety of sources, especially those that are not obvious.

Key concepts and ideas are identified. Explanations or interpretations of them demonstrate solid understanding. Demonstrates serious engagement of material from a broad variety of sources.

Demonstrates a solid effort to gather empirical data from a broad variety of sources.

Key concepts and ideas are identified and explained or interpreted correctly but superficially. Demonstrates obvious effort to read beyond given references.

Demonstrates some serious effort to gather empirical data from a variety of sources.

Not all key concepts and ideas are identified and are not always explained or interpreted correctly. Demonstrates limited reading of the literature beyond given references.

Demonstrates minor effort to gather empirical data from a variety of sources.

Fails to identify key concepts and ideas, or if identified, are explained or interpreted incorrectly. Demonstrates no serious reading of any of the literature.

Demonstrates no meaningful effort to gather empirical data from a variety of sources (domestic/international, print/electronic, etc.).

Analysis and Synthesis: (40%)

Clear and precise introduction and conclusion (executive summary for report-style), which includes, if required, recommendation.

Integration of theory (ideas), data (evidence) and conclusion and recommendation, where appropriate.

Use of diagrams, charts and other illustrations.

Introduction defines and sets parameters clearly and precisely. Conclusion is an excellent summary of the arguments and provides an exceptionally clear and precise response.

Exceptional and creative integration of theory/ideas and evidence to produce a highly convincing argument.

Diagrams, charts and other illustrations are professionally presented and insightful deductions from them are expertly interwoven into the text to support analyses.

Introduction defines and sets parameters clearly and precisely but is perfunctorily. Conclusion is a solid summary of the arguments and provides clear and precise response.

Solid, but not necessarily creative integration of theory/ideas and evidence to produce a convincing argument.

Diagrams, charts and other illustrations are completely free of errors and correct deductions are made from them to support analyses.

Introduction defines assignment question clearly, but parameters are imprecise. Conclusion adequately summarises the arguments and provides a clear but imprecise response to the question.

Demonstrates pedestrian competency in integrating theory/ideas and evidence to produce an argument.

Diagrams, charts and other illustrations are largely free of errors and deductions are made from them to support analyses.

Introduction weakly defines and fails to set parameters for question. Conclusion is a minimal summary of the arguments and provides a weak response to the question.

Some attempt is made to integrate theory/ideas and evidence to produce an argument.

Diagrams, charts and other illustrations contain only a few significant errors.

Introduction fails to define and set parameters for, assignment question. Conclusion neither summarises the arguments nor provides an answer to the assignment question.

No attempt is made to integrate theory and evidence to produce an argument to answer assignment question or provide recommendation.

Diagrams, charts and other illustrations are poor quality, with numerous significant errors.