| MGT5PSC: Assessment 4 marking rubric | |||||
| CRITERIA | Excellent (> 80 %) | Very good (70 – 79%) | Good (60 – 69%) | Acceptable (50 – 59%) | Unacceptable (<50%) |
| Written Coherence and Structure (e.g. table of contents, headings, consistency, traceability, professionalism) (10% of total mark) |
☐ Fluently structured, persuasively addresses the task, and employs a novel/interpretive/innovative approach. (8-10 marks) |
☐ Consistently logically structured, with sustained use of supporting evidence, clearly focusing on the task. (7 marks) |
☐ Somewhat logically structured, with appropriate use of evidence in addressing the task. (6 marks) |
☐ Attempts logical structure, citing limited evidence, without constructing a clear response to the task. (5 marks) |
☐ Does not employ a structured approach to the task, and there is insufficient evidence to support (<5 marks) |
| Analysis of supply issues Analysis of operations issues Analysis of information issues Analysis of integration issues Analysis of sustainability issues Note: as part of this criteria, your analysis specific to tasks ‘a’ to ‘e’ uploaded into your Google Site will be reviewed (40% of total mark) |
☐ Strategically and critically applies relevant procurement and supply chain knowledge, using coherent frameworks and models to analyse issues recognising theoretical/practical constraints and making justifiable, evidence-based decisions. (32-40 marks) |
☐ Interpretively applies relevant procurement and supply chain knowledge, frameworks and models to analyse issues, highlighting some of the problems which challenge the applied theoretical approach, and makes justifiable decisions. (28-31 marks) |
☐ Coherently deploys some relevant procurement and supply chain knowledge, with limited use of frameworks and models to analyse issues, while attempting theoretical justification for decisions. (24-27 marks) |
☐ Recognises the requirement to draw upon relevant procurement and supply chain knowledge, frameworks and models to analyse issues, but in a rudimentary or superficial fashion. (21-23 marks) |
☐ Does not demonstrate awareness of the requirement to connect relevant procurement and supply chain knowledge, frameworks and models with assessment tasks, or does so in an inappropriate or unintelligible fashion. (<20 marks) |
| Discussion of the company’s procurement and supply chain analysis using a theoretical framework (30% of total mark) |
☐ Demonstrates an expert understanding of the issues by synthesising findings into a meaningful supply chain wide discussion of issues drawing on a complex theoretical framework (24-30 marks) |
☐ Demonstrates a good understanding of the issues by synthesising findings into a meaningful supply chain wide discussion of issues drawing on a complex theoretical framework (21-23 marks) |
☐ Demonstrates an understanding of the issues by synthesising findings into a supply chain-wide discussion of issues drawing on a relevant theoretical framework. (18-20 marks) |
☐ Demonstrates some understanding of issues by synthesising findings into a supply chain-wide discussion of issues drawing on a theoretical framework (15-17 marks) |
☐ Does not employ a recognisable or coherent disciplinary approach for synthesising findings nor draw on any theoretical framework (<15 marks) |
| CONTINUED OVER PAGE…. |
| CRITERIA | Excellent (> 80 %) | Very good (70 – 79%) | Good (60 – 69%) | Acceptable (50 – 59%) | Unacceptable (<50%) |
| Improvement programs focused on supply, operations, information, integration and sustainability issues (15% of total mark) |
☐ Proposes excellent improvement programs grounded in the supply chain wide synthesis of issues that would clearly and practically contribute to the company achieving its vision, mission and strategic goals (12-15 marks) |
☐ Proposes very good improvement programs grounded in the supply chain wide synthesis of issues that would practically contribute to the company achieving its vision, mission and strategic goals (11-12 marks) |
☐ Proposes good improvement programs, generally grounded in the supply chain-wide synthesis of issues, and would likely contribute to the company achieving its vision, mission and strategic goals (9-10 marks) |
☐ Proposes improvement programs, partially grounded in the supply chain-wide synthesis of issues, and could possibly contribute to the company achieving its vision, mission and strategic goals (7-8 marks) |
☐ Does not propose adequate improvement programs (<7 marks) |
| Maintenance of Google site (5% of total mark) |
☐ Highly organised and structured, incorporating authoritative design, and presenting a persuasive Google Site. (5 marks) |
☐ Well organised and structured, incorporating effective design and presenting a reasonable Google Site. (3-4 marks) |
☐ Incoherent, irrelevant design, with little or no focus on developing a credible Google Site. (< 3 marks) |