Assessment Task 3: Individual Essay (out of 50)
| Criteria | Unsatisfactory | Acceptable | Good | Superior | Outstanding |
| Identification of key issues and problems in the case (out of 7) |
Relevant issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues are poorly identified. |
Shows some understanding of relevant issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. |
Shows adequate understanding of relevant issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. |
Shows superior knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. |
Shows outstanding knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. |
| Quality of analysis and recommendations (out of 12) |
Too descriptive. Lack of a central argument and clarity in analysis. Specific data or evidence necessary to support the analysis and conclusions was not provided. |
Shows some evidence of what is required in quality analysis. Unsubstantiated assertions are made at times. Arguments need further development. Some adequate recommendations and/or plans of actions were made. |
Uses evidence drawn from a range of sources to support claims, but does not critically engage with the evidence. There may be some gaps in reasoning. Some effective recommendations and/or plans of action were provided. |
Provides persuasive analysis of the issue at hand to develop a clear and robust argument. Substantial evidence of critical thought. Well supported recommendations, solutions, and/or plans of action were provided. |
Analysis is sophisticated and nuanced, evaluates competing ideas from a number of standpoints. Persuasive and insightful recommendations, solutions, and/or plans of action were provided that are supported by compelling evidence. |
| Understanding of key theories and concepts (out of 12) |
Does not demonstrate adequate understanding of key theories and concepts. Definition or discussion of key concepts is heavily relying on direct quotes or improperly paraphrased. |
Has some understanding of key theories and concepts but has over reliance on quotations or poor paraphrases. |
Demonstrates good understanding of key theories and concepts. Has adequate breadth, but limited depth of understanding of the theories and concepts. |
Demonstrates breadth and depth of understanding of key theories and concepts. Can apply accurately and has transformed the ideas so that they can express them appropriately in their own words. |
Demonstrates accurate and elaborated breadth and depth of understanding of key theories and course concept in the knowledge domain. Knows how particular facts came to be. |
| Quality, relevance and sufficiency of research (out of 7) |
Does not meet the minimum scholarly reference requirement. No evidence of independent research. |
Meets the scholarly reference requirement but shows limited evidence of independent research. Use of literature and additional materials is very limited and/or largely irrelevant. |
Meets the scholarly reference requirement. Shows evidence of engagement with relevant literature but does not always discriminate effectively between sources of information. |
Meets the scholarly reference requirement. Evidence of independent research. Employs relevant literature on the topic effectively. Shows a good, sound knowledge of the literature and good research skills. |
Meets the scholarly reference requirement. Demonstrates a thorough and critically reflective approach to source selection appropriate to the task. Demonstrates high level of independent thought in locating required information. Is selective and discriminates between sources of information in an appropriate and critical manner for the task. |
| Appropriate structure (logical sequence; transitions between parts; well-developed paragraphs) (out of 5) |
Messy and illogical structure. Sections are disjointed and disconnected with one another. Paragraphs were poorly organised or unfocused. |
Some attempt is made to organise the essay into discrete sections but some sections seem irrelevant and/or their links with others are unclear. Some paragraphs were poorly organised. |
Text is structured with clearly defined parts, although these could be developed more effectively / be more coherent. Transition between paragraphs is mostly logical. Paragraphs generally coherent. |
Clear structure. Links between sections and paragraphs are clear. Each paragraph is well developed. |
Text is well‐structured and coherent. Each paragraph serves a purpose in advancing the argument. Paragraphs draw together the strands of arguments effectively while also reflecting on the implications of the arguments presented. Logical links between the different sections. |
| Format and presentation including clarity of expression and grammar, correct format of in-text citations and bibliography, and meeting the word limit requirement (out of 5) |
Too difficult to read due to too many errors in expression, grammar, or spelling. Lack of proper referencing. |
Spelling and grammar require editing. Some sentences require rewriting for clarity and/or paragraph structure is poor in places. Writing style may be choppy in places and/or poor flow-on from one idea to the next. Lack of consistency in referencing. |
Consistent referencing with minor errors of style or presentation. Occasional grammatical or spelling errors. Frequent awkward expressions. Perhaps some unexplained jargon. |
Clearly written and free from grammatical errors. Consistent academic writing style, with well structured sentences and paragraphs. Appropriate and correct referencing throughout the text. |
Sophisticated, clear and fluent writing. Correct spelling and grammar used effectively throughout. Highly effective academic writing style, with clear and consistent links to arguments in the text. Use of academic conventions such as referencing and citation is both consistent and appropriate. |
| Micro-cred completed | Micro-cred incomplete | ||||
| Micro-credential completion (out of 2) |
Evidence of badge presented in assessment. (2 marks) | No evidence of badge presented in assessment. (0 mark) |
The post Identification of key issues appeared first on My Assignment Online.
