| | | | | | |
Criteria | Excellent | Outstanding | Acceptable (Minimally Proficient) | Needs Improvement | Needs Significant Improvement | Missing or Unacceptable |
Assessed the appropriate physical security for the organization | Provided an excellent description of the requirements, proposal, and justification for the physical security solution. | Provided an outstanding description of the requirements, proposal, and justification for the physical security solution. | Provided a description of the requirements, proposal, and justification for the physical security solution. | Provided a description of the requirements and proposal for the physical security solution, but lacked an appropriate justification. | Identified requirements for the physical security solution, but the proposal and justification lacked detail and/or was not well supported. | The requirements, proposal, and justification for the physical security solution were off topic or failed to provide required level of detail. |
Identified the appropriate mobile device security to implement | Provided an excellent description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for mobile device security. | Provided an outstanding description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for mobile device security. | Provided a description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for mobile device security. | Provided a description of the technical requirements and proposal for mobile device security, but lacked an appropriate justification. | Identified a technical requirement for mobile device security, but the proposal and justification lacked detail and/or was not well supported. | The technical requirements, proposal, and justification for mobile device security were off topic or failed to provide required level of detail. |
Assessed the proper perimeter defenses to defend the organization | Provided an excellent description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the perimeter defenses. | Provided an outstanding description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the perimeter defenses. | Provided a description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the perimeter defenses. | Provided a description of the technical requirements and proposal for the perimeter defenses, but lacked an appropriate justification. | Identified a technical requirement for the perimeter defenses, but the proposal and justification lacked detail and/or was not well supported. | The technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the perimeter defenses were off topic or failed to provide required level of detail. |
Assessed the proper network defense devices to defend the organization | Provided an excellent description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the network defense devices. | Provided an outstanding description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the network defense devices. | Provided a description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the network defense devices. | Provided a description of the technical requirements and proposal for the network defense devices, but lacked an appropriate justification. | Identified a technical requirement, but the proposal and justification for the network defense devices lacked detail and/or was not well supported. | The technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the network defense devices were off topic or failed to provide required level of detail. |
Assessed the proper host defense to defend the organization | Provided an excellent description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the host defenses. | Provided an outstanding description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the host defenses. | Provided a description of the technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the host defenses. | Provided a description of the technical requirements and proposal for the host defenses, but lacked an appropriate justification. | Identified a technical requirement for the host defenses, but the proposal and justification lacked detail and/or was not well supported. | The technical requirements, proposal, and justification for the host defenses were off topic or failed to provide required level of detail. |
Use of Authoritative Sources / Resources | Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited sources. Reference list entries and in-text citations are correctly formatted using the appropriate IEEE style for each type of resource. The description appropriately used information from 5 or more authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade publications, news articles, industry or government white papers and authoritative Web sites. | Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited sources. One or two minor errors in IEEE format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries. The description appropriately used information from 4 or more authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade publications, news articles, industry or government white papers and authoritative Web sites. | Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited sources. No more than 5 minor errors in IEEE format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries. The description appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade publications, news articles, industry or government white papers and authoritative Web sites. | Work contains a reference list containing entries for cited sources. Work contains no more than 5 minor errors in IEEE format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries. The description appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade publications, news articles, industry or government white papers and authoritative Web sites. | Work attempts to credit sources but demonstrates a fundamental failure to understand and apply the IEEE formatting standard. The description appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade publications, news articles, industry or government white papers and authoritative Web sites. | Reference list is missing. Work demonstrates an overall failure to incorporate and/or credit authoritative sources for information used in the paper. |
Satisfy standards of writing style and grammatical correctness | No formatting, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. | Work contains minor errors in formatting, grammar, spelling or punctuation which do not significantly impact professional appearance. | Errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which detract from professional appearance of the submitted work. | Submitted work has numerous errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Work is unprofessional in appearance. | Submitted work is difficult to read / understand and has significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, or word usage. | No work submitted for this assignment. |