Marking Rubric Individual Assignment

141 views 9:06 am 0 Comments July 6, 2023

1

MGT5OBR Assessment 2Marketing Research and Data Analysis Marking Rubric
Individual Assignment
CRITERIA Excellent (80 – 100%) Very good (70 – 79%) Good (60 – 69%) Acceptable (50 – 59%) Unacceptable (<50%)
Introduction
(5%)		 Excellent introduction which
clearly describes the two (2)
CHOSEN theories, concepts or
frameworks; clearly sets focus
of the essay and provides
essay structure.		 Very good introduction
with concise description of
the two (2) CHOSEN
theories, concepts or
frameworks; sets focus of
the essay and structure.		 Description of the two (2)
CHOSEN theories, concepts or
frameworks is mostly clear
and concise. Some irrelevant
details or could have more
detail on key information.		 Description of the two
(2) CHOSEN theories,
concepts or frameworks
provided. Some details
inappropriate or unclear.		 Description of the two
(2) CHOSEN theories,
concepts or
frameworks lacks focus
on key or relevant
details.
Demonstrated
knowledge
and critical
analysis of OB
theory
(50%)		 Excellent analysis and critical
examination of the two (2)
CHOSEN theories, concepts or
frameworks.
No errors in reasoning,
accuracy or relevance.
Argument is strongly
supported by relevant and
specific examples.		 Very good analysis and
critical examination of the
two (2) CHOSEN theories,
concepts or frameworks.
Very few and minor errors
in reasoning, accuracy or
relevance. Argument is
well supported by relevant
and specific examples.		 Good analysis and critical
examination of the two (2)
CHOSEN theories, concepts or
frameworks. May include
some minor errors in
reasoning, accuracy or
relevance. Argument is
supported by relevant and
specific examples.		 Solid analysis. May
include fewer than two
(2) CHOSEN theories,
concepts or frameworks.
May have some minor or
a few major errors in
reasoning, accuracy or
relevance. Examples may
require improvement.		 Does not analyse
theories, concepts or
frameworks as
assigned,
or is mostly inaccurate
or irrelevant. Examples
are disjointed or
incorrectly stated.
Critical
application
(25%)		 Excellent, logical and relevant
linkage between the two (2)
CHOSEN theories, concepts or
frameworks. Argument is
strongly supported by
relevant and specific
examples.		 Very good, logical and
relevant linkage between
the two (2) CHOSEN
theories, concepts or
frameworks. Argument is
well supported by relevant
and specific examples.		 Good linkage between the
two (2) CHOSEN theories,
concepts or frameworks.
Argument is supported by
examples.		 Solid linkage. May have
some minor or a few
major errors in
reasoning, accuracy or
relevance. Examples
included but require
improvement.		 Basic or
underdeveloped
linkage. Examples are
disjointed or
incorrectly stated.
Structure,
organisation,
and writing
(10%)		 Sequence and structure are
logical and easy to follow;
excellent overall organisation.
Excellent grammar and
spelling.		 Sequence and structure
are logical and easy to
follow; very good overall
organisation. Very good
grammar and spelling.		 Structured well enough to
make sense; could be better
organised and more tightly
focused upon the topic. Good
grammar and spelling.		 Mostly coherent
organisation; may have
some sections difficult to
follow reasoning. Some
grammar and spelling
errors.		 Lacks coherent
organisation. Describes
disconnected bits of
information or many
direct quotes. Poor
spelling and grammar.
Referencing
(10%)		 Excellent use of relevant and
appropriate academic
sources. Correct referencing
used throughout.		 Very good use of relevant
and appropriate academic
sources. Correct
referencing.		 Good use of relevant and
appropriate academic
sources. Good referencing.		 Acceptable use of
relevant academic
sources. Mostly correct
referencing.		 Few if any academic
sources included and
poor referencing.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,