EVT802-Assessment 1 - Online Discussion Forum Marking Rubric
High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail
35-40 30-34 26-29 20-25 0-19
Original
Posts
All four posts have been
carefully selected to provide a
highly relevant example of risk
management practices within
the context of events.
Each post expertly uses the
terminology of risk
management, is discussed with
definitions, examples and
references.
Each post demonstrates a high
level of understanding of the
concepts used (accurate,
coherent, unambiguous) with
accurate description.
Early participation ( in first
weeks).
Each post discusses potential
limitations and improvement
to the standard risk process
All six posts have been
carefully selected to provide a
relevant example of risk
management practices within
the context of events.
Each post uses the
terminology of risk
management very well, is
discussed with definitions,
examples and references.
Each post demonstrates a very
good level of understanding of
the concepts used (accurate,
coherent, unambiguous) with
accurate description.
Early participation ( in first
weeks).
Each post discusses potential
limitations and improvement
to the standard risk process
Each post provides a relevant
example of sustainable event
practices. The posts provide
a good description of the
practice selected and why it
is considered best practice.
At least four of the six
posts provide a
relevant example of
risk management
practices within the
context of events.
Not enough relevant
examples of sustainable
event practices shown in
the posts and/or some
posts are missing or not
relevant.
26-30 23-25 20-22 15-19 0-14
Reply Posts Two excellent responses to
others’ postings.
Each response adds significant
value to the original post using
highly appropriate
Two very good responses to
others’ postings.
Each response adds very good
value to the original post using
very appropriate
Two good response posts
made that add value to the
original post using some
analysis/argument/ review of
the related practices
Two relevant response
post made although
limited in terms of
adding value to the
original post.
Two response posts not
made and/or responses are
not relevant.
analysis/argument/ review of
the practices
Use of logical and justifiable
argument or position
Ability to find counter
examples and or confirmation
examples
Ability to compare and
contrast different view,
processes and facts.
Excellent discussion about
potential limitations and
improvement to the standard
risk process
analysis/argument/ review of
the practices
Use of logical and justifiable
argument or position
Very good attempts to find
counter examples and or
confirmation examples
Very good attempts to
compare and contrast
different view, processes and
facts.
Very good discussion about
potential limitations and
improvement to the standard
risk process
Some use of logical and
justifiable argument or
position
Good attempts to find
counter examples and or
confirmation examples
Good attempts to compare
and contrast different view,
processes and facts.
Ggood discussion about
potential limitations and
improvement to the
standard risk process
8.5-10 7.5-8 6.5-7 5-6 0-4.5
Research
Wide range of relevant sources
used for all six posts, including
reliable and reputable internet
sites, academic literature and
company reports
Use of the International
Standard and the standards for
risk in the discussion.
Very good range of relevant
sources. Includes a variety of
types of source material
Good range of relevant
sources. Includes a variety of
types of source material
Satisfactory number of
relevant sources with
some variety in the
types of source
material.
Inadequate range of
sources and/or mostly
inappropriate, irrelevant
sources. Reliance on one
type of source. E.g.
webpages or one company.
8.5-10 7.5-8 6.5-7 5-6 0-4.5
Referencing
All sources are accurately
documented in the reference
list using APA 7 system. Correct
in-text citation used
throughout the report.
All sources are accurately
documented in the reference
list using APA 7 system.
Correct in-text citation used
throughout the report.
Most sources are
documented correctly in the
reference list and in-text
citations are used
throughout the report.
Reference list uses APA
7 but has a number of
errors in formatting
and/or some
references missing. In-
Inappropriate formatting –
shows little understanding
of APA7 system and some
references missing
text citation attempted
but may not match the
reference list.
8.5-10 7.5-8 6.5-7 5-6 0-4.5
Writing and
Presentation
Each entry is of a professional
standard, interesting and easy
to read with a logical, coherent
structure, with no grammar or
spelling errors. All academic
requirements as per ICMS style
guide are met.
Each entry is of a professional
standard, interesting and easy
to read with a logical, coherent
structure. Few grammar or
spelling errors. All academic
requirements as per ICMS style
guide are met.
Correct format with mostly
correct English usage. Some
grammar and spelling errors.
Most academic requirements
as per ICMS style guide are
met.
Correct format with
mostly correct English
usage but a number of
grammar and spelling
errors. Most academic
requirements as per
ICMS style guide are
met.
Information is disorganised
with little coherence or
structure. Frequent
grammar and spelling
mistakes that make it
difficult to understand. A
number of the academic
requirements as per ICMS
style guide are not met.
Total
/100