Case Study 3

Criteria

Excellent

Outstanding

Acceptable

Needs Improvement

Needs Significant Improvement

Missing or Unacceptable

Introduction or Overview for the Case Study

20 points

Provided an excellent introduction or overview of the cybersecurity workforce issues which impact State governments. This overview addressed 5 or more specific political, economic, socio-cultural (included education), and technological factors which contribute to the perceived lack of qualified cybersecurity workers. The overview appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

18 points

Provided an outstanding introduction or overview of the cybersecurity workforce issues which impact State governments. This overview addressed 4 or more specific political, economic, socio-cultural (included education), and technological factors which contribute to the perceived lack of qualified cybersecurity workers. The overview appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

16 points

Provided an introduction or overview of the cybersecurity workforce issues which impact State governments. This overview addressed 3 or more specific political, economic, socio-cultural (included education), and technological factors which contribute to the perceived lack of qualified cybersecurity workers. The overview appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.

14 points

Provided an overview but the section lacked important details about the case. Information from authoritative sources was cited and used in the overview.

10 points

Attempted to provide an introduction to the case study but this section lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.

0 points

The introduction and/or overview sections of the paper were off topic.

Reasons Behind Cybersecurity Workforce Shortages in State Government

15 points

Provided an excellent discussion of the reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified cybersecurity workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 3 or more specific examples specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

8.5 points

Provided an outstanding discussion of the reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified cybersecurity workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 3 or more specific examples specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

7 points

Discussed two or more reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified cybersecurity workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.

6 points

Discussed at least one reason why states have difficulty hiring enough personnel for their cybersecurity positions in state agencies and offices. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

4 points

Attempted to provide information about state hiring difficulties for cybersecurity personnel but the discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.

0 points

This section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide information about hiring in state governments for cybersecurity personnel.

Non-Cybersecurity Reasons Why States Have Difficulty Hiring Trained & Qualified Workers

15 points

Provided an excellent discussion of the "non-cybersecurity" reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 5 or more general examples which were not specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

8.5 points

Provided an excellent discussion of the "non-cybersecurity" reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 4 or more general examples which were not specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

7 points

Provided a discussion of the "non-cybersecurity" reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided at least one general example which was not specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.

6 points

Discussed at least one non-cybersecurity reason why states have difficulty hiring enough personnel for their cybersecurity positions in state agencies and offices. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

4 points

Attempted to provide information about non cybersecurity reasons behind state hiring difficulties for cybersecurity personnel but the discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.

0 points

This section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide information about hiring in state governments for cybersecurity personnel.

Recommendations for Alternative Hiring Practices to Attract and Retain Cybersecurity Personnel

20 points

Provided an excellent discussion which addressed at least five marketing or hiring actions which state governments could take to attract cybersecurity talent and reduce or alleviate a cybersecurity workforce shortage for trained and qualified cybersecurity personnel. These recommendations included 3 or more alternative practices which deemphasize salary. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

18 points

Provided an outstanding discussion which addressed at least three marketing or hiring actions which state governments could take to attract cybersecurity talent and reduce or alleviate a cybersecurity workforce shortage for trained and qualified cybersecurity personnel. These recommendations included 2 or more alternative practices which deemphasize salary. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

16 points

Discussed marketing or hiring actions which state governments could take to attract cybersecurity talent and reduce or alleviate a cybersecurity workforce shortage for trained and qualified cybersecurity personnel. These recommendations included at least one alternative practice which deemphasized salary. Appropriately used information from  1 or more authoritative sources.

14 points

Recommended at least two hiring practices which could help state governments recruit and retain cyber security personnel.  Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

9 points

Recommended at least one hiring practice which could help state governments recruit and retain cyber security personnel. 

0 points

Did not address best practices for hiring cybersecurity personnel.

Addressed security issues using standard cybersecurity terminology

5 points

Demonstrated excellence in the integration of standard cybersecurity terminology into the case study.

4 points

Provided an outstanding integration of standard cybersecurity terminology into the case study.

3 points

Integrated standard cybersecurity terminology into the into the case study

2 points

Used standard cybersecurity terminology but this usage was not well integrated with the discussion.

1 point

Misused standard cybersecurity terminology.

0 points

Did not integrate standard cybersecurity terminology into the discussion.

APA Formatting for Citations and Reference List

5 points

Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. Reference list entries and in-text citations are correctly formatted using the appropriate APA style for each type of resource.

4 points

Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. One or two minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.

3 points

Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. No more than 3 minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.

2 points

Work has no more than three paragraphs with omissions of citations crediting sources for facts and information. Work contains a reference list containing entries for cited resources. Work contains no more than 5 minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.

1 point

Work attempts to credit sources but demonstrates a fundamental failure to understand and apply the APA formatting standard as defined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.).

0 points

Reference list is missing. Work demonstrates an overall failure to incorporate and/or credit authoritative sources for information used in the paper.

Professionalism Part I: Organization & Appearance

5 points

Submitted work shows outstanding organization and the use of color, fonts, titles, headings and sub-headings, etc. is appropriate to the assignment type.

4 points

Submitted work has minor style or formatting flaws but still presents a professional appearance. Submitted work is well organized and appropriately uses color, fonts, and section headings (per the assignment’s directions).

3 points

Organization and/or appearance of submitted work could be improved through better use of fonts, color, titles, headings, etc. OR Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Professional appearance could be improved.

2 points

Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Organization and professional appearance need substantial improvement.

1 point

Submitted work meets minimum requirements but has major style and formatting errors. Work is disorganized and needs to be rewritten for readability and professional appearance.

0 points

Submitted work is poorly organized and formatted. Writing and presentation are lacking in professional style and appearance. Work does not reflect college level writing skills.

Professionalism Part II: Execution

15 points

No formatting, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors.

14 points

Work contains minor errors in formatting, grammar, spelling or punctuation which do not significantly impact professional appearance.

13 points

Errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which detract from professional appearance of the submitted work.

11 points

Submitted work has numerous errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Work is unprofessional in appearance.

4 points

Submitted work is difficult to read / understand and has significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, or word usage.

0 points

Submitted work is poorly executed OR does not reflect college level work.

Overall Score

Excellent

90 or more

Outstanding

80 or more

Acceptable

70 or more

Needs Improvement

56 or more

Needs Significant Improvement

36 or more

Missing or Unacceptable

0 or more