微信客服：xiaoxionga100
微信客服：ITCS521
程序代写案例-MGMT5050
时间：2021-11-01
MGMT5050 Case Study Assignment – Marking rubric T3 2021
MGMT5050 – Case Study Assignment Marking Rubric
T3 2021
Criteria Unacceptable
Unsatisfactory
Pass
Credit
Distinction
High Distinction
Demonstrates knowledge and
understanding of context and case
Demonstrates little or no knowledge
of the case study
Marks: 0
Knowledge of the case study is
weak, and superficial.
There are discrepancies in the level
of analysis of the selected issue and
the evidence presented.
No real application of models to
identify issues. There are multiple
inaccuracies in the facts, names of
important individuals, events and/or
relationships.
Marks: 7
Shows solid understanding of the
facts of the case appropriate for the
issue selected as the theme of the
report.
Evidence presented is appropriate
for the issue.
PEST or 5 Ws used but lacks depth.
There are minor inaccuracies in the
names of important individuals,
events and/or relationships.
Marks: 11
Shows solid understanding of the
facts of the case appropriate for the
issue selected as the theme of the
report.
Evidence presented is appropriate
for the issue and level of analysis.
PEST and 5 Ws are used. There are
no inaccuracies in the names of
important individuals, events and/or
relationships.
Marks: 14
Demonstrates a thorough grasp of
the facts of case, appropriate for the
issue selected as the theme of the
case study.
Evidence presented is appropriate
and extensive for the issue and level
of analysis.
Solid and applied use of PEST and 5
Ws. There are no inaccuracies in the
names of important individuals,
events and/or relationships.
Marks: 16
Develops a well-integrated statement
of the complexity of the case study in
relation to the issue selected.
Evidence presented is appropriate and
extensive for the issue and level of
analysis.
Solid and applied use of PEST and 5 Ws
to gain insight. There are no
inaccuracies in the names of important
individuals, events and/or
relationships.
Marks: 20
Critically analyses the problem(s)
using appropriate academic
concepts, theories and research
No academic sources used
Marks: 0
Uses less than the required
compulsory sources and/or too few
additional sources to critically
analyse the case study.
Marks: 10
Identifies and describes concepts
and theories appropriate for the
issues identified in the case study.
There is little acknowledgement of
alternative courses of action
.
Marks: 21
Engages in some critical analysis of
the problem (s) drawing on 3 set
articles and the 3 researched
academic sources.
The report presents a discussion of
possible alternative courses of
action. Uses the appropriate ethical
academic frameworks
Marks 24.5
Engages in critical analysis of the
problem drawing at least 3 set
articles and the 3 additional
academic sources.
Demonstrates a thorough grasp of
the case study and of complex
theoretical and conceptual models
and identifies and supports a
number of possible and realistic
alternatives. The integration of
concept to case study may on
occasion be cumbersome. Uses the
appropriate ethical academic
frameworks in a critical manner
Marks 28
Presents a sophisticated critical
analysis of the problem incorporating
at least the 3 set and additional 3
academic sources leading to a
sophisticated and complex analysis of
the problem, as well as to the
identification and discussion of
realistic alternatives. Uses the
appropriate ethical academic
frameworks in a critical manner with
depth of understanding
Marks: 35
MGMT5050 Case Study Assignment – Marking rubric T3 2021
Proposes recommendations to the
analysis/solution to the
problem(s) based on sound
evidence and concepts / theories
No recommendations/solution
proposed in the report.
Marks: 0
Describes recommendations/
solution to the case study. There is
little evidence to link the proposed
solution to the analysis of the
problem or alternatives.
Not attempt to identify any
problems or risks with the proposed
solution.
Marks:5
Proposed
recommendations/solution is based
on solid evidence from the case
study with descriptive support of
appropriate theories and concepts.
There may be some attempt at
identifying potential risks, although
these may be cursory at best.
Marks: 9
Proposed recommendations/
solution clearly drawn from an
analysis of alternative courses of
action. There is evidence that this
process has been supported by
appropriate theories and concepts.
The report describes potential risks
with the selected solution.
Marks: 10.5
Proposed recommendations/
solution clearly drawn from an
analysis of alternative courses of
action. The proposed solution
clearly addresses the identified
issue(s) and is supported by a
detailed analysis of appropriate
academic theories and concepts.
The report identifies and analyses
potential risks with the selected
solution.
Marks: 12
Proposed a sophisticated
recommendation/ solution clearly
drawn from an analysis of alternative
courses of action. The proposed
solution clearly addresses the
identified issue(s) and is supported by
a thorough and complex analysis of
appropriate academic theories and
concepts.
The report provides a well-developed
discussion of the possible risks with
the selected solution, risk mitigation
strategies and appropriate evaluation
techniques.
Marks: 15
Structures text logically and
coherently
The report is poorly structured;
primarily a list/ bullet points.
Excessive reliance on quotes
The document may include exhibits,
tables or appendices, however their
presence is not explained and their
relevance to the case study is
tenuous.
Marks: 1
The report is poorly structured;
introduction and/or conclusion not
clear or effective; body not clearly
structured; paragraphs/sections not
well-developed; ineffective
transitions between paragraphs
and/or sections.
The report includes exhibits, tables
or appendices, the inclusion of some
may not be clear. They are
consistently labeled although the
reader may not be directed to them
in the text.
Marks: 2.5
The report is structured with an
appropriate introduction and
conclusion. Transition between
paragraphs could be improved.
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are for the most part appropriate
and contribute to the reader’s
understanding of the case study and
issue. They are consistently labeled
and the reader is directed to each of
them at appropriate points
throughout the text.
Marks: 5
The report is effectively organized
and for the most part engages the
reader’s interest. The sequence/
structure supports the central
theme and argument. The text
spends appropriate amount of
words on details
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are for the most part appropriate
and contribute to the readers
understanding of the case study and
issue. They are consistently labeled
and the reader is directed to each of
them at appropriate points
throughout the text.
Marks: 7
The report is well sequenced, easy to
follow and for the most part engages
the reader’s interest. The
arrangement of ideas enhances the
reader’s understanding. There are
unified paragraphs and graceful
transitions.
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are appropriate and contribute to
the readers understanding of the
case study and issue. They are
consistently labeled and the reader
is directed to each of them at
appropriate points throughout the
text.
Marks: 8
The report is of publishable quality,
and consistently engages the reader’s
interest. The arrangement of ideas
enhances the reader’s understanding
of the case study and demonstrates
depth of knowledge. There are unified
paragraphs and graceful transitions.
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are appropriate and contribute to the
readers understanding of the case
study and issue. They are
consistently labeled and the reader is
directed to each of them at
appropriate points throughout the
text.
Marks: 10
MGMT5050 Case Study Assignment – Marking rubric T3 2021
Communicates clearly and
concisely
Does not express (or explain where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words where possible).
Excessive use of informal/
inappropriate language (eg ‘txt’
language, contractions, slang) poor
sentence construction (incomplete
sentences),
Poor paragraph structure (ie 1 or 2
sentence paragraphs)
Uses inaccurate
expression/grammar which often
makes meaning unclear.
Mark: 1
Does not express (or explain where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words where possible).
Excessive use of informal/
inappropriate language (eg ‘txt’
language, contractions, slang) Poor
sentence construction (incomplete
sentences),
Poor paragraph structure (ie 1 or 2
sentence paragraphs)
Uses inaccurate
expression/grammar which often
makes meaning unclear.
Mark: 3
Generally, but not consistently,
expresses (and explains where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words as much as possible).
Some spelling mistakes, use of
contractions, poor sentence
construction (incomplete
sentences), inappropriate / informal
word choice, such as “text”
language, spelling, or slang
Poor paragraph structure (ie 1 or 2
sentence paragraphs)
Mark: 5
Generally, but not consistently,
expresses (and explains where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words as much as possible).
Some spelling mistakes and rare use
of contractions, no informal word
choice, such as “text” language,
spelling, or slang; mainly paragraph
structure
Mark: 7
Expresses (and explains where
necessary) complex ideas,
arguments and information clearly
and concisely in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words as appropriate).
No spelling mistakes and rare use of
contractions, no informal word
choice, such as “text” language,
spelling, or slang; paragraph
structure
Mark: 8
Consistently expresses (and explains
where necessary) complex ideas,
arguments and information clearly and
concisely in language appropriate for
the intended audience and purpose
(using own words as appropriate).
Uses fluent, accurate
expression/grammar
No spelling mistakes, absence of
contractions, appropriate tone, well
constructed paragraphs
Mark: 10
Presents text professionally and
references sources accurately
Does not present document at a
professional standard, e.g.
- No evidence of editing
(frequent spelling/
punctuation errors)
- Document does not follow
formatting requirements
- Style is not appropriate or
sufficiently formal for the
specific business/academic
context
No sources cited.
And/or
Report is outside the word limit
boundaries (ie too short or too long)
Mark: 0
Does not present document at a
professional standard, e.g.
- Little evidence of editing
(numerous spelling/
punctuation errors)
- Document does not follow
formatting requirements
- Style is not appropriate or
sufficiently formal for the
specific business/academic
context
Does not reference sources
appropriately/ accurately in-text, or
in reference list using Harvard (in
text) style).
Report conforms to word limit
boundaries
Mark: 3
Presents document at a satisfactory
professional standard, e.g.:
- Some evidence of editing (only
minor spelling/ punctuation
errors)
- conforms to all but 2-3
formatting requirements
- Style and presentation are
appropriate and sufficiently
formal for the specific
business/ academic context
References sources in-text and in
reference list mainly accurately
using Harvard (in text) style).
Report conforms to word limit
boundaries
Mark: 7
Professional presentation, e.g.:
- Evidence of thorough editing
(e.g., no or negligible spelling
/punctuation errors)
- conforms to all formatting
requirements
- Style and presentation are
highly appropriate for the
specific business/academic
context
References all sources in-text and in
reference list accurately using Harvard
(in text) style).
Report conforms to word limit
boundaries
Mark: 10
学霸联盟
学霸联盟
MGMT5050 – Case Study Assignment Marking Rubric
T3 2021
Criteria Unacceptable
Unsatisfactory
Pass
Credit
Distinction
High Distinction
Demonstrates knowledge and
understanding of context and case
Demonstrates little or no knowledge
of the case study
Marks: 0
Knowledge of the case study is
weak, and superficial.
There are discrepancies in the level
of analysis of the selected issue and
the evidence presented.
No real application of models to
identify issues. There are multiple
inaccuracies in the facts, names of
important individuals, events and/or
relationships.
Marks: 7
Shows solid understanding of the
facts of the case appropriate for the
issue selected as the theme of the
report.
Evidence presented is appropriate
for the issue.
PEST or 5 Ws used but lacks depth.
There are minor inaccuracies in the
names of important individuals,
events and/or relationships.
Marks: 11
Shows solid understanding of the
facts of the case appropriate for the
issue selected as the theme of the
report.
Evidence presented is appropriate
for the issue and level of analysis.
PEST and 5 Ws are used. There are
no inaccuracies in the names of
important individuals, events and/or
relationships.
Marks: 14
Demonstrates a thorough grasp of
the facts of case, appropriate for the
issue selected as the theme of the
case study.
Evidence presented is appropriate
and extensive for the issue and level
of analysis.
Solid and applied use of PEST and 5
Ws. There are no inaccuracies in the
names of important individuals,
events and/or relationships.
Marks: 16
Develops a well-integrated statement
of the complexity of the case study in
relation to the issue selected.
Evidence presented is appropriate and
extensive for the issue and level of
analysis.
Solid and applied use of PEST and 5 Ws
to gain insight. There are no
inaccuracies in the names of important
individuals, events and/or
relationships.
Marks: 20
Critically analyses the problem(s)
using appropriate academic
concepts, theories and research
No academic sources used
Marks: 0
Uses less than the required
compulsory sources and/or too few
additional sources to critically
analyse the case study.
Marks: 10
Identifies and describes concepts
and theories appropriate for the
issues identified in the case study.
There is little acknowledgement of
alternative courses of action
.
Marks: 21
Engages in some critical analysis of
the problem (s) drawing on 3 set
articles and the 3 researched
academic sources.
The report presents a discussion of
possible alternative courses of
action. Uses the appropriate ethical
academic frameworks
Marks 24.5
Engages in critical analysis of the
problem drawing at least 3 set
articles and the 3 additional
academic sources.
Demonstrates a thorough grasp of
the case study and of complex
theoretical and conceptual models
and identifies and supports a
number of possible and realistic
alternatives. The integration of
concept to case study may on
occasion be cumbersome. Uses the
appropriate ethical academic
frameworks in a critical manner
Marks 28
Presents a sophisticated critical
analysis of the problem incorporating
at least the 3 set and additional 3
academic sources leading to a
sophisticated and complex analysis of
the problem, as well as to the
identification and discussion of
realistic alternatives. Uses the
appropriate ethical academic
frameworks in a critical manner with
depth of understanding
Marks: 35
MGMT5050 Case Study Assignment – Marking rubric T3 2021
Proposes recommendations to the
analysis/solution to the
problem(s) based on sound
evidence and concepts / theories
No recommendations/solution
proposed in the report.
Marks: 0
Describes recommendations/
solution to the case study. There is
little evidence to link the proposed
solution to the analysis of the
problem or alternatives.
Not attempt to identify any
problems or risks with the proposed
solution.
Marks:5
Proposed
recommendations/solution is based
on solid evidence from the case
study with descriptive support of
appropriate theories and concepts.
There may be some attempt at
identifying potential risks, although
these may be cursory at best.
Marks: 9
Proposed recommendations/
solution clearly drawn from an
analysis of alternative courses of
action. There is evidence that this
process has been supported by
appropriate theories and concepts.
The report describes potential risks
with the selected solution.
Marks: 10.5
Proposed recommendations/
solution clearly drawn from an
analysis of alternative courses of
action. The proposed solution
clearly addresses the identified
issue(s) and is supported by a
detailed analysis of appropriate
academic theories and concepts.
The report identifies and analyses
potential risks with the selected
solution.
Marks: 12
Proposed a sophisticated
recommendation/ solution clearly
drawn from an analysis of alternative
courses of action. The proposed
solution clearly addresses the
identified issue(s) and is supported by
a thorough and complex analysis of
appropriate academic theories and
concepts.
The report provides a well-developed
discussion of the possible risks with
the selected solution, risk mitigation
strategies and appropriate evaluation
techniques.
Marks: 15
Structures text logically and
coherently
The report is poorly structured;
primarily a list/ bullet points.
Excessive reliance on quotes
The document may include exhibits,
tables or appendices, however their
presence is not explained and their
relevance to the case study is
tenuous.
Marks: 1
The report is poorly structured;
introduction and/or conclusion not
clear or effective; body not clearly
structured; paragraphs/sections not
well-developed; ineffective
transitions between paragraphs
and/or sections.
The report includes exhibits, tables
or appendices, the inclusion of some
may not be clear. They are
consistently labeled although the
reader may not be directed to them
in the text.
Marks: 2.5
The report is structured with an
appropriate introduction and
conclusion. Transition between
paragraphs could be improved.
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are for the most part appropriate
and contribute to the reader’s
understanding of the case study and
issue. They are consistently labeled
and the reader is directed to each of
them at appropriate points
throughout the text.
Marks: 5
The report is effectively organized
and for the most part engages the
reader’s interest. The sequence/
structure supports the central
theme and argument. The text
spends appropriate amount of
words on details
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are for the most part appropriate
and contribute to the readers
understanding of the case study and
issue. They are consistently labeled
and the reader is directed to each of
them at appropriate points
throughout the text.
Marks: 7
The report is well sequenced, easy to
follow and for the most part engages
the reader’s interest. The
arrangement of ideas enhances the
reader’s understanding. There are
unified paragraphs and graceful
transitions.
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are appropriate and contribute to
the readers understanding of the
case study and issue. They are
consistently labeled and the reader
is directed to each of them at
appropriate points throughout the
text.
Marks: 8
The report is of publishable quality,
and consistently engages the reader’s
interest. The arrangement of ideas
enhances the reader’s understanding
of the case study and demonstrates
depth of knowledge. There are unified
paragraphs and graceful transitions.
The exhibits, tables and appendices
are appropriate and contribute to the
readers understanding of the case
study and issue. They are
consistently labeled and the reader is
directed to each of them at
appropriate points throughout the
text.
Marks: 10
MGMT5050 Case Study Assignment – Marking rubric T3 2021
Communicates clearly and
concisely
Does not express (or explain where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words where possible).
Excessive use of informal/
inappropriate language (eg ‘txt’
language, contractions, slang) poor
sentence construction (incomplete
sentences),
Poor paragraph structure (ie 1 or 2
sentence paragraphs)
Uses inaccurate
expression/grammar which often
makes meaning unclear.
Mark: 1
Does not express (or explain where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words where possible).
Excessive use of informal/
inappropriate language (eg ‘txt’
language, contractions, slang) Poor
sentence construction (incomplete
sentences),
Poor paragraph structure (ie 1 or 2
sentence paragraphs)
Uses inaccurate
expression/grammar which often
makes meaning unclear.
Mark: 3
Generally, but not consistently,
expresses (and explains where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words as much as possible).
Some spelling mistakes, use of
contractions, poor sentence
construction (incomplete
sentences), inappropriate / informal
word choice, such as “text”
language, spelling, or slang
Poor paragraph structure (ie 1 or 2
sentence paragraphs)
Mark: 5
Generally, but not consistently,
expresses (and explains where
necessary) complex ideas and
information clearly in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words as much as possible).
Some spelling mistakes and rare use
of contractions, no informal word
choice, such as “text” language,
spelling, or slang; mainly paragraph
structure
Mark: 7
Expresses (and explains where
necessary) complex ideas,
arguments and information clearly
and concisely in language
appropriate for the intended
audience and purpose (using own
words as appropriate).
No spelling mistakes and rare use of
contractions, no informal word
choice, such as “text” language,
spelling, or slang; paragraph
structure
Mark: 8
Consistently expresses (and explains
where necessary) complex ideas,
arguments and information clearly and
concisely in language appropriate for
the intended audience and purpose
(using own words as appropriate).
Uses fluent, accurate
expression/grammar
No spelling mistakes, absence of
contractions, appropriate tone, well
constructed paragraphs
Mark: 10
Presents text professionally and
references sources accurately
Does not present document at a
professional standard, e.g.
- No evidence of editing
(frequent spelling/
punctuation errors)
- Document does not follow
formatting requirements
- Style is not appropriate or
sufficiently formal for the
specific business/academic
context
No sources cited.
And/or
Report is outside the word limit
boundaries (ie too short or too long)
Mark: 0
Does not present document at a
professional standard, e.g.
- Little evidence of editing
(numerous spelling/
punctuation errors)
- Document does not follow
formatting requirements
- Style is not appropriate or
sufficiently formal for the
specific business/academic
context
Does not reference sources
appropriately/ accurately in-text, or
in reference list using Harvard (in
text) style).
Report conforms to word limit
boundaries
Mark: 3
Presents document at a satisfactory
professional standard, e.g.:
- Some evidence of editing (only
minor spelling/ punctuation
errors)
- conforms to all but 2-3
formatting requirements
- Style and presentation are
appropriate and sufficiently
formal for the specific
business/ academic context
References sources in-text and in
reference list mainly accurately
using Harvard (in text) style).
Report conforms to word limit
boundaries
Mark: 7
Professional presentation, e.g.:
- Evidence of thorough editing
(e.g., no or negligible spelling
/punctuation errors)
- conforms to all formatting
requirements
- Style and presentation are
highly appropriate for the
specific business/academic
context
References all sources in-text and in
reference list accurately using Harvard
(in text) style).
Report conforms to word limit
boundaries
Mark: 10
学霸联盟
学霸联盟
