BUSM 1222: Country Analysis Marking Rubric (out of 40)
| Criteria | Unsatisfactory | Acceptable | Good | Superior | Outstanding |
| • Understanding and application of key theories / concepts (out of 10) |
Does not identify / demonstrate adequate understanding of relevant theories. No use of key theories / concepts to explain the case or major inaccuracies. |
Relevant theories are identified but the discussion showed little grasp of the theories, limited evidence of engagement with relevant theories or some inaccuracies. |
Relevant theories are identified and discussed. Discussed key ideas from the relevant theories but not sufficiently or with minor inaccuracies. |
Relevant theories are identified and discussed in students’ own words. Discussed key ideas, evidence and conclusions from the literature accurately. |
Showed outstanding understanding of key theories. Relevant theories are identified and discussed thoroughly and critically in students’ own words. Discussed key ideas, evidence and conclusions from the literature accurately and eloquently. |
| • Identification of issues and quality of analysis (out of 14) |
Does not identify and summarise relevant issue, is confused or identifies a different or inappropriate issue. Lack of clarity or consistency in analysis. Too descriptive. Argument is unclear and/or under-developed. |
Shows some understanding of relevant issues and their impact on MNEs. Shows limited understanding of what is required in critical analysis. Makes unsubstantiated assertions. Argument is unclear and/or under-developed. |
Shows adequate understanding of relevant issues and their impact on MNEs. There may be gaps in reasoning but some evidence of critical analysis. Development of analysis adequate but argument at times need support or further development. |
Shows superior understanding of relevant issues and their impact on MNEs. Clear and complete development of analysis. Presents a nuanced and critical review, with substantial evidence of critical thought. Develop persuasive arguments. |
Shows outstanding understanding of relevant issues and their impact on MNEs. Full and rich development of analysis (purpose, relevance, focus, explanations, support). Analysis is sophisticated and nuanced. Makes and supports persuasive arguments. |
| • Quality of research and writing technique (including referencing) (out of 8) |
Does not meet the scholarly reference requirement. No evidence of independent research. Too difficult to read due to too many errors in expression, grammar, or spelling. No attempt to use formal business language; wordiness and colloquialisms throughout. Lack of proper referencing. |
Meets the scholarly reference requirement, but some resources have little relevance to the project topic. 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. |
Meets the scholarly reference requirement. Most resources are relevant to the project topic. Consistent referencing with minor errors of style or presentation. Paragraphs do not flow logically at times. Occasional grammatical or spelling errors. Frequent awkward expressions. |
Meets the scholarly reference requirement. Evidence of independent research. Shows good research skills. Clearly written and free from grammatical errors. Consistent academic writing style, with well-structured sentences and paragraphs. Appropriate and correct referencing throughout the thesis. |
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. Sophisticated, clear and fluent writing. Highly effective academic writing style; correct spelling and grammar used effectively throughout. Use of academic conventions such as referencing and citation are both consistent and appropriate. |
| • Reflection (out of 8) |
Lack of reflection. No examples from the chosen case. Reflection is largely irrelevant to the country analysis. |
Some thoughtful reflection linked to the chosen case. However, used incomplete or vaguely developed examples. |
Some thoughtful reflection linked to the chosen case, including some supporting details and examples. |
In-depth reflection linked to the chosen case. Relevant examples are included. |
Excellent reflection providing specific and convincing examples from the chosen case. Insightful connections between the project and managerial implications. |
The post BUSM 1222: Country Analysis Marking Rubric appeared first on My Assignment Online.
Plagiarism Free Assignment Help
Expert Help With This Assignment — On Your Terms
✓ Native UK, USA & Australia writers
✓ Deadline from 3 hours
✓ 100% Plagiarism-Free — Turnitin included
✓ Unlimited free revisions
✓ Free to submit — compare quotes
