BUS226 Marking Rubric – Report (40%) Performance indicators DOES NOT ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD MEETS.
BUS226 Marking Rubric – Report (40%)
Performance indicators
DOES NOT ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD
MEETS STANDARD
EXCEEDS STANDARD
Marks obtained
N (below 50%)
P (50 – 59%)
C (60 – 69%)
D (70 – 79%)
HD (80 – 100%)
Introduction 10%
Introduction is unclear and does not outline the report structure.
Introduction is fairly clear, outlines the report structure. Introduction does not fit the topic within the broader academic literature.
Introduction is clear, outlines the report structure. Introduction positions the topic within the broader academic literature
Introduction is clear, succinct and outlines the structure of the report. Introduction positions the topic within the broader academic literature. . A hook is used to attract the reader.
Introduction is clear, succinct and outlines the structure of the report. Introduction positions the topic within the broader academic literature. An interesting hook is used to attract the reader.
/10
Depth and breadth of analysis 30%
Insufficient work and research. Discussion contains significant flaws such as large gaps in knowledge of key issues and/or errors in application of concepts/theories.
Evidence most key issues understood and addressed. Evidence of required reading. Awareness and understanding at a basic level of the major concepts, theories and frameworks involved. Flaws in thinking may be present in aspects of work.
Covers the key issues. Analysis of the issues/concepts/theories involved with clear presentation of components. Ideas generally organised and logically presented. Some evidence of additional reading.
Evidence of relevant reading of quality sources and effective integration into arguments. Intelligent organisation and expansion of concepts and ideas, with sound analysis and discussion of implications involved.
Integrated complex knowledge of frameworks and presented a sound critical analysis that is well supported. Evidence of extensive reading of quality sources and strong analysis that reflects a deep understanding. Broad coverage of causes and remedies.
/30
Understanding of key HR theories/models and links to previous knowledge 20%
Demonstrates insufficient understanding of theory and or does not link new learning to previous knowledge
Demonstrates basic understanding of theory and links new learning to previous knowledge
Demonstrates some understanding of theory and links new learning to previous knowledge
Demonstrates good understanding of theory and links new learning to previous knowledge
Demonstrates high level understanding of theory and links new learning to previous knowledge
/20
Depth of research 20%
Less than 5 academic references.
5 references to recent, credible and relevant sources.
6 to 7 references to recent, credible and relevant sources.
7 to 8 references to recent, credible and relevant sources.
9 to 10 references to recent, credible and relevant sources.
/20
English Expression 10%
Errors distract the reader to the extent that meaning is unclear.
Errors are distracting, but the meaning is still clear.
Some errors are present, but overall the meaning is clear.
A few minor errors that do not distract the reader. The meaning is clear.
Virtually free from grammatical, punctuation errors.
/10
Formatting & Referencing 10%
In-text and End-text contains many serious errors. Referencing is very poor and does not follow standard guidelines.
In-text and End-text contains a number of serious errors. Referencing is poor and does not follow standard guidelines.
In-text and End-text contains minor errors. Referencing is adequate. Not all standard guidelines are followed.
In-text and End-text contains a few very minor errors. Referencing is good. Most standard referencing guidelines are followed.
In-text and End-text contains no errors. Referencing is very good. Standard referencing guidelines are followed.
/10
Marks
_____ out of 100
_____ out of 40

