Assignment Again
Case Study Potential Resolutions
|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 100.0 %Criteria |
| |||||
| 20.0 %Summary of the Organizational Structure Issue | A summary of the organizational structure issue is not presented. | A summary of the organizational structure issue is included, but inaccurate or incomplete. | A summary of the organizational structure issue is presented, but does not focus on the financial concerns of the case. | A summary of the organizational structure issue is presented and focuses on the financial concerns of the case. | A summary of the organizational structure issue is thoroughly presented and strongly focuses on the financial concerns of the case offering rich detail. | |
| 60.0 %Discussion of at Least Two Potential Resolutions Reinforces C.2.3: Recommend the application of newly developed or revised theories to specific business opportunities and challenges. | A discussion of at least two potential resolutions is not presented. | A discussion of at least two potential resolutions is presented, but resolutions are ill-conceived and illogical. No research or organizational structure analysis support is offered. | A discussion of at least two potential resolutions is presented, but is cursory and lacking in depth. Resolutions may be viable but appear hastily conceived and lack depth of thought. Research and organizational structure analysis support is limited and from dated resources. | A discussion of at least two potential resolutions is presented, logical, and thorough. Resolutions are viable, appear moderately well-conceived, and are logical. Research and organizational structure analysis support is limited but from current resources. | A discussion of at least two potential resolutions is thoroughly presented with clear logic and rich detail. Resolutions are viable and well-conceived and display exceptional depth of thought. Research and organizational structure analysis support is thorough and from current resources. | |
| 10.0 %Synthesis and Argument | No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources. | Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing, presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | |
| 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing | Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | |
| 5.0 %APA Format | Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used. | Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used. | Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present. | Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. | The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. | |
| 100 %Total Weightage | ||||||
