Rubric: Case Study - VSM



|Case Study Grading Rubric |

|Undergraduate Percentage Scale: |0.00 – 57.49% |57.50 – 76.24% |76.25 - 93.74% |93.75 - 100% |

|Undergraduate Scaled Score: |0.0 – 0.6 |0.7 – 2.1 |2.2 - 3.5 |3.6 - 4.0 |

| |% |Below Standard |Approaching Standard |At Standard |Exceeds Standard |

|Clear explanation of key strategic issues |20% |Shows little understanding of the|Shows some understanding of the |Shows adequate knowledge of the |Shows superior knowledge of the |

|• The problems, scope, and seriousness was clearly identified in the discussions. | |issues, key problems, and the |issues, key problems, and the |issues, key problems, and the |issues, key problems, and the |

|• There was a well focused diagnosis of strategic issues and key problems that | |company’s present situation and |company’s present situation and |company’s present situation and |company’s present situation and |

|demonstrated a good grasp of the company’s present situation and strategic issues. | |strategic issues. |strategic issues. |strategic issues. |strategic issues. |

|• Effective Executive Summary | |Executive summary missing or |Executive summary inadequate |Executive summary adequate |Effective Executive Summary |

|• Did not waste space summarizing information already found in the case. | |poorly constructed | | | |

|Valid arguments; analysis of financial performance with relevant supportive detail |20% |Critical issues and key problems |Critical issues and key problems |Critical issues and key problems |Critical issues and key problems |

|Logically organized, key points, key arguments, and important criteria for evaluating| |that supported the Case Analysis |that supported the Case Analysis |that supported the Case Analysis |that supported the Case Analysis |

|business strategies were easily identified | |were poorly identified, analyzed,|were not clearly identified, |were partially identified, |were clearly identified, |

|Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis were identified and| |and supported. |analyzed, and supported. |analyzed, and supported. |analyzed, and supported. |

|clearly analyzed and supported. | | | | | |

|Appropriate analysis, evaluation, synthesis for the specific industry identified |20% |Analysis of key change drivers |Analysis of key change drivers |Analysis of key change drivers |Analysis of key change drivers |

|There was complete data on which to base a thorough analysis | |and the underlying the issues |and the underlying the issues |and the underlying the issues |and the underlying the issues |

|Key change drivers underlying the issues were identified. | |inadequate. |were not identified. |were partially identified |were clearly identified |

|Synthesis, analysis, and evaluations were clearly presented and supported in a | | | | | |

|literate and effective manner. | | | | | |

|Conclusions and recommendations are congruent with strategic analysis |20% |Effective recommendations and/or |Effective recommendations and/or |Effective recommendations and/or |Effective recommendations, |

|Specific recommendations and/or plans of action provided. | |plans of action not provided. |plans of action inadequate. |plans of action were partially |solutions, and/or plans of action|

|Specific data or facts were referred to when necessary to support the analysis and | |Specific data or facts necessary |Specific data or facts were not |provided. |were provided. |

|conclusions. | |to support the analysis and |referred when necessary to |Specific data or facts were |Specific data or facts were |

|Recommendations and conclusions were presented and supported in a literate and | |conclusions was not provided. |support the analysis and |occasionally referred when |referred when necessary to |

|effective manner. | | |conclusions. |necessary to support the analysis|support the analysis and |

| | | | |and conclusions. |conclusions. |

|Proper organization, professional writing, and logical flow of analysis. APA |20% |Key points were poorly identified|Key points were not identified |Key points were partially |Key points were clearly |

|formatting | |and supported with a well thought|and supported with a well thought|identified and supported with a |identified and supported with a |

|Logically organized, key points, key arguments, and important criteria for evaluating| |out rationale based on applying |out rationale based on applying |well thought out rationale based |well thought out rationale based |

|the business logic easily identified. | |specific concepts or analytical |specific concepts or analytical |on applying specific concepts or |on applying specific concepts or |

|Key points were supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying | |frameworks to the data provided |frameworks to the data provided |analytical frameworks to the data|analytical frameworks to the data|

|specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. | |in the case. |in the case. |provided in the case. |provided in the case. |

|Proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, 3rd person objective view, professional | |Grammar, spelling, punctuation, |Grammar, spelling, punctuation, |Adequate grammar, spelling, |Excellent grammar, spelling, |

|writing, and syntax. | |professional writing, and syntax |professional writing, and syntax |punctuation, professional |punctuation, professional |

| | |needs significant improvement |needs improvement |writing, and syntax |writing, and syntax |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download