|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Criteria
|
Outstanding
|
Superior
|
Good
|
Substandard
|
Failure
|
|
Content: Ranking of Candidates
|
1.6 points
Demonstrates an exceptional ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing thorough and insightful reasoning for ranking candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.
(1.44 - 1.6)
|
1.36 points
Demonstrates an excellent ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing thorough and insightful reasoning for ranking candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.
(1.28 - 1.43)
|
1.2 points
Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing good reasoning for ranking candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.
(1.12 - 1.27)
|
1.04 points
Demonstrates a limited ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing little to no reasoning for ranking candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.
(0.96 - 1.11)
|
0 points
Failed to rank candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.
(0)
|
|
Content: Take Personality Test
|
1.6 points
Takes free personality test. Clearly identifies personality type and provides an exceptional, thorough and insightful discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type.
(1.44 - 1.6)
|
1.36 points
Takes free personality test. Clearly identifies personality type and provides an excellent, thorough and insightful discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type.
(1.28 - 1.43 )
|
1.2 points
Takes free personality test. Clearly identifies personality type and provides a satisfactory discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type.
(1.12 - 1.27)
|
1.04 points
Takes free personality test and identifies personality type and provides a discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type but there are missing elements; or takes free personality test but dies not discuss effects of the type preferences in a workplace or preferred methods of communication for type.
(0.96 - 1.11)
|
0 points
Fails to takes free personality test or provide discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type but there are missing elements
(0)
|
|
Content: Compare Results & Select Top Two Candidates
|
1.6 points
Demonstrates an exceptional ability to compare your results against those of the candidates and selects the top two candidates whom you will work with the best with thorough explanations of the reasons for the conclusions using the course material and facts from case study in doing so.
(1.44 - 1.6)
|
1.36 points
Demonstrates an excellent ability to compare your results against those of the candidates and selects the top two candidates whom you will work with the best with good explanations of the reasons for the conclusions using the course material and facts from case study in doing so.
(1.28 - 1.43 )
|
1.2 points
Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to compare your results against those of the candidates and selects the top two candidates whom you will work with the best with an explanation of the reasons for the conclusions and attempts to use the course material and facts from case study in doing so.
(1.12 - 1.27)
|
1.04 points
Demonstrates a limited ability to compare your results against those of the candidates and selects candidates whom you will work with the best but may be missing elements such as the two candidates, an explanation or reasoning or using course material/facts.
(0.96 - 1.11)
|
0 points
Fails to compare results of personality test against those of the candidates and does not select top candidates or provide reasoning.
(0 - 0.95)
|
|
Content: Interview Questions
|
1.6 points
Creates five (5) interview questions that address leadership "people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish's notes and are important to you.
(1.44 - 1.6)
|
1.36 points
Creates four (4) interview questions that address leadership "people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish's notes and are important to you.
(1.28 - 1.43)
|
1.2 points
Creates three (3) interview questions that address leadership "people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish's notes and are important to you.
(1.12 - 1.27)
|
1.04 points
Creates one or two interview questions that address leadership "people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish's notes and are important to you.
(0.96 - 1.11)
|
0 points
Fails to create interview questions that address leadership "people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish's notes and are important to you.
(0)
|
|
Critical Thinking/Reasoning
|
4 points
Comments reflect a highly accomplished level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurate, thorough, and soundly reasoned conclusions.
(3.6 - 4.0)
|
3.4 points
Comments reflect an excellent level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurately reasoned conclusions.
(3.2 – 3.59 )
|
3 points
Comments reflect a satisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in partially correct conclusions that lack development or detail that demonstrates insight into reasoning.
(2.8 - 3.19)
|
2.6 points
Comments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in conclusions that are underdeveloped or lack soundly reasoned conclusions.
(2.4 - 2.79)
|
0 points
Comments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in failure to draw little to no conclusions.
(0 – 2.39)
|
|
Application of Resources
|
3.6 points
Presents exceptionally well-supported arguments or positions with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.
(3.24 - 3.6)
|
3.06 points
Presents excellent arguments or positions that are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.
(2.88 - 3.23)
|
2.7 points
Satisfactory arguments or positions are presented but there is a mix of opinion or unclear view with supported arguments using course readings. Case study facts are occasionally used but arguments would be much stronger with use of facts.
(2.52 - 2.87)
|
2.34 points
Arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; Limited use of facts in case study and essential information presented in course readings.
(2.16 - 2.51)
|
0 points
Arguments lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas. Does not provide facts presented in case study.
(0 – 2.15)
|
|
Attention to Instructions
|
3 points
Demonstrates exceptional understanding of requirements responding completely to each aspect of assignment including minor aspects of the assignment such as using third person writing, required use of course readings, and assignment format.
(2.7 - 3.0)
|
2.55 points
Demonstrates excellent understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment.
(2.4 - 2.69)
|
2.25 points
Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment.
(2.1 - 2.39)
|
1.95 points
Fails to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment.
(1.8 - 2.09)
|
0 points
Fails to demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements.
(0 – 1.79)
|
|
Writing Mechanics
|
2 points
Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No errors found. No contractions or jargon used.
(1.8 – 2.0)
|
1.7 points
Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. One to three errors found.
(1.6 – 1.79)
|
1.5 points
Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Four to 10 errors found.
(1.4 – 1.59)
|
1.3 points
Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.
(1.2 – 1.39)
|
0 points
Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.
(0 – 1.19)
|
|
APA Style (6th ed.)
|
1 point
No APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.
(0.9 - 1.0)
|
0.85 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference list but one or two APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.
(0.8 – 0.89)
|
0.75 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 times in document.
(0.7 – 0.79)
|
0.65 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 4-5 times; or presents only 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper that requires APA citations throughout the document.
(0.6 – 0.69)
|
0 points
No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.
(0 - 0.59)
|
|
Overall Score
|
Outstanding
18 or more
|
Superior
16 or more
|
Good
14 or more
|
Substandard
12 or more
|
Failure
0 or more
|
i.mtti
paper_ii_grading_rubric.docx
0
