MGT5MPT: Assessment 3 – Organisational Culture and Well-being Change Framework. Marking criteria
latrobe.edu.auArgumentative Essay Assignment
| CRITERIA | A: Excellent (> 80 %) | B: Very good (70 – 79%) | C: Good (60 – 69%) | D: Acceptable (50 – 59%) | N: Unacceptable (<50%) |
| GROUP COMPONENT (20marks) |
|||||
| Effective communication and management literacy (3.2 marks) |
Outstanding level of application of knowledge and skills. High level of specialised cognitive and technical understanding in management. Highly accurate and appropriate language use. Expertly written and adheres to the business genre. No errors in grammar or spelling are evident. Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, and persuasive, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments. (2.6-3.2 marks) |
Effective level of application of knowledge and skills. Good level of specialised cognitive and technical understanding in management. Accurate and appropriate language use. Well written and adheres to the business genre. Minimal errors in grammar and/or spelling are evident. Information, arguments and evidence are well presented; the presentation is logical, and clear. (2.3-2.5 marks) |
Average level of application of knowledge and skills. Average level of specialised cognitive and technical understanding in management. Average language use. Is of average writing and adheres to the business genre. Many errors in grammar and/or spelling are evident. Information, arguments and evidence are presented in an average manner, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. (1.9-2.2 marks) |
Poor level of application of knowledge and skills. Poor level of specialised cognitive and technical understanding in management. Poor language use. Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar. Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas. Makes assertions that are not justified. (1.6-1.8 marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable (<1.8 marks) |
| Organisational problems and constraints (4 marks) |
Organisational problems and constraints are clearly detailed & discussed deeply. (3.2-4 marks) |
Organisational problems and constraints are detailed and discussed in good depth. (2.8-3.1 marks) |
Organisational problems and constraints are detailed and discussed in average depth. (2.4-2.7 marks) |
Organisational problems & constraints are not detailed or not discussed well. (2-2.3 marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable (<2 marks) |
MGT5MPT: Assessment 3 – Organisational Culture and Well-being Change Framework. Marking criteria
latrobe.edu.au
| Change framework (6 marks) |
A highly applicable organisational change framework is selected (or synthesised from a number of appropriate change frameworks). The appropriateness of the change framework is clearly justified in relation to the organisation and associated problems. (4.8-6 marks) |
An applicable organisational change framework is selected (or synthesised from a number of appropriate change frameworks). The appropriateness of the change framework is justified in good depth in relation to the organisation and associated problems. (4.2-4.7 marks) |
An applicable organisational change framework is selected. The appropriateness of the change framework is justified in an average manner in relation to the organisation and associated problems. (3.6-4.1 marks) |
An applicable organisational change framework is not selected, or: The appropriateness of the change framework is not justified. (3-3.5marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable (<3 marks) |
| Change Implementation (4 marks) |
Discussion and implementation oforganisational change framework demonstrates keen high-level insight towards creating an innovative, flexible and adaptive organisation. Change approach draws upon practical, contemporary, and evidence-based literature Change approach includes detailed steps towards mitigating organisational change constraints. (3.2-4 marks) |
Discussion and implementation oforganisational change framework demonstrates keen insight towards creating an innovative, flexible and adaptive organisation. Change approach draws upon practical, contemporary, and evidence-based literature Change approach includes detailed steps towards mitigating organisational change constraints. (2.8-3.1 marks) |
Discussion and implementation oforganisational change framework demonstrates some insight towards creating an innovative, flexible and adaptive organisation. Change approach draws upon some practical, contemporary, and/or evidence-based literature Change approach includes steps towards mitigating organisational change constraints. (2.4-2.7 marks) |
Discussion and implementation of organisational change framework does not demonstrate insight towards creating an innovative, flexible and adaptive organisation. Change approach draws upon little, if any practical, contemporary, and/or evidence- based literature Change approach includes few, if any steps towards mitigating organisational change constraints. (2-2.3 marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable (<2 marks) |
MGT5MPT: Assessment 3 – Organisational Culture and Well-being Change Framework. Marking criteria
latrobe.edu.au
| Supporting research (2.8 marks) |
Provides comprehensive justification of approach through robust and contemporary supporting evidence. (2.3-2.8 marks) |
Provides decent justification of approach through robust and contemporary supporting evidence. (2-2.2 marks) |
Provides average justification of approach through mostly robust and contemporary supporting evidence. (1.7-1.9 marks) |
Provides little justification of approach, little if any robust and contemporary supporting evidence (1.4-1.8 marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable (<1.4 marks) |
| INDIVIDUAL COMPONENT (15marks) |
|||||
| Critical analysis of presentation (4 marks) |
Excellent critical analysis and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of recommendations made. (3.2-4 marks) |
Very good critical analysis and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of recommendations made. (2.8-3.1 marks) |
Good critical analysis and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of recommendations made. (2.4-2.7 marks) |
Fair critical analysis and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of recommendations made. (2-2.3 marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable (<2 marks) |
| Reflection on group (4 marks) |
Insightful self-reflection and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of points and argument. (3.2-4 marks) |
Very good self-reflection and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of points and argument. (2.8-3.1 marks) |
Good self-reflection and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of points and argument. (2.4-2.7 marks) |
Fair self-reflection and discussion of the group presentation, including well explained justification of points and argument. (2-2.3 marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable (<2 marks) |
| Self Reflection (4 marks) |
Insightful self-reflection and discussion of your role in the group presentation and its impact on your professional capabilities including well explained justification of your reflection and argument (3.2-4 marks) |
Very good self-reflection and discussion of your role in the group presentation and its impact on your professional capabilities including well explained justification of your reflection and argument (2.8-3.1 marks) |
Good self-reflection and discussion of your role in the group presentation and its impact on your professional capabilities including well explained justification of your reflection and argument (2.4-2.7 marks) |
Fair self-reflection and discussion of your role in the group presentation and its impact on your professional capabilities including well explainedjustification of your reflection and argument (2-2.3 marks) |
Little or no attempt. Missing or unacceptable presentation and its impact on your professional capabilities. Little or no justification of your reflection and argument (<2 marks) |
MGT5MPT: Assessment 3 – Organisational Culture and Well-being Change Framework. Marking criteria
latrobe.edu.au
| Writing and Referencing (3 marks) |
Excellent use of relevant and appropriate sources of literature. Correct referencing used throughout. Excellent grammar and spelling. (2.4-3 marks) |
Very good use of relevant and appropriate sources of literature. Correct referencing, and good grammar and spelling. (2.1-2.3 marks) |
Good use of relevant and appropriate sources of literature (1.8-2 marks) |
Rair use of relevant sources of literature. Mostly correct referencing. Some grammar and spelling errors. (1.5-1.7 marks) |
Few if any literature sources included and poor referencing. Poor spelling and grammar. (<1.5 marks) |