|
|
|
|
|
|
Criteria 1
|
Outstanding
|
Superior
|
Good
|
Substandard
|
Failure
|
Introduction
|
0.6 points
States thesis clearly and concisely, and comprehensively discusses the main points made in the paper.
(0.54 - 0.60)
|
0.51 points
States thesis clearly but further development of the main points of the paper is needed.
(0.48 - 0.539)
|
0.45 points
States thesis and explains general ideas of the main points of the paper.
(0.42 - 0.479)
|
0.39 points
Attempts to state thesis that discusses the main points to be covered in the paper or presents an introduction that is irrelevant to the thesis.
(0.36 - 0.419)
|
0 points
Does not provide an introduction.
(0)
|
Criteria 2
|
Outstanding
|
Excellent
|
Good
|
Substandard
|
Failure
|
Ethical Dilemmas
|
2.4 points
Identified 3 business ethical dilemmas and 1 personal dilemma and logically concluded with a thorough use of case study facts and class material.
(2.16 - 2.4)
|
2.04 points
Identified 3 business ethical dilemmas and 1 personal dilemma and soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of case study facts and class material but explanation needs more detailed development.
(1.92 - 2.159)
|
1.8 points
Three of 4 four dilemmas identified using weak reasoning or minimal use of case study facts or course material.
(1.68 - 1.919)
|
1.56 points
One or two of the dilemmas identified with weak reasoning or little or no use of case study facts and class material.
(1.44 - 1.579)
|
0 points
None of the ethical dilemmas identified correctly or did not address the dilemmas.
(0 - 1.439)
|
Ethical Dilemma Category
|
2.4 points
Identifies and discusses the three common ethical issues categories to which each of the three dilemmas belong that are logically concluded with thorough use of case study facts and class material.
(2.16 - 2.40)
|
2.04 points
Identifies and discusses the three common ethical issues categories to which each of the three dilemmas belong using sound reasoning and concluded through the use of case study facts and class material but explanation needs more detailed development.
(1.92 - 2.159)
|
1.8 points
Identifies and discusses two of the common ethical issues categories to which each of the three dilemmas belong using weak reasoning or minimal use of case study facts or course material.
(1.68 - 1.919)
|
1.56 points
Identifies and discusses one or two of the common ethical issues categories to which each of the three dilemmas belong with weak reasoning or little or no use of case study facts and class material.
(1.44 - 1.679)
|
0 points
Fails to identify or discuss the common ethical issues categories
(0)
|
Criteria 3
|
Outstanding
|
Excellent
|
Good
|
Sustandard
|
Failure
|
State dilemmas and apply to theorists
|
2.7 points
States each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theorists using 3 dilemmas logically concluded with a thorough and concise use of the class material, the facts from the case scenario and additional research necessary to answer the question.
(2.43 - 2.7)
|
2.295 points
States each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theorists using 3 dilemmas logically concluded with sound reasoning and concluded through the use of class material, the facts from the case scenario and research but arguments need more detailed development.
(2.16 - 2.429)
|
2.025 points
Attempts to states each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theorists using 3 dilemmas with some reasoning and minimal use of class material, the facts from the case scenario and research.
(1.89 - 2.159)
|
1.755 points
Attempts to states each dilemma in question form and applies the ethical theorists using 3 dilemmas with little or no use of reasoning, use of case scenario and research; or only one or two dilemmas stated or application of theories are incomplete.
(1.62 - 1.879)
|
0 points
Fails to state each dilemma nor apples ethical theorists.
(0)
|
Criteria 4
|
Outstanding
|
Superior
|
Good
|
Substandard
|
Failure
|
Compare results and select one theorist who would best solve all three dilemmas.
|
2.4 points
Compares the results and selects one theorist who would best solve all three dilemmas, .concluded with a thorough use of case study facts and class material and personal ethical values that influenced decision process.
(2.16 - 2.40)
|
2.04 points
Compares the results and selects one theorist who would best solve all three dilemmas, .concluded with a sound use of case study facts and class material and personal ethical values.
(1.92 - 2.159)
|
1.8 points
Compares the results and selects one theorist who would best solve all three dilemmas, using some reasoning and minimal use of class material, facts from the case scenario and personal ethical values.
(1.68 - 1.919)
|
1.56 points
Attempted to compare the results and select one theorist who would best solve all three dilemmas, little or no use of reasoning, use of class material, facts from the case scenario and personal ethical values.
(1.44 - 1.679)
|
0 points
Fails to compare the results and does not select a theorist.
(0)
|
Criteria 5
|
Outstanding
|
Excellent
|
Good
|
Substandard
|
Failure
|
Attention to Instructions
|
2.25 points
The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper also includes completion of all minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format.
(2.025 - 2.25)
|
1.9125 points
The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper missed one minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format.
(1.8 - 2.024)
|
1.688 points
One major assignment tasks or two minor aspects of the assignment missed.
(1.575 - 1.79)
|
1.46 points
Two major assignment tasks and/or three or more minor aspects of the assignments missed.
(1.35 - 1.574)
|
0 points
Three or more major assignment tasks missed.
(0)
|
Criteria 6
|
Outstanding
|
Superior
|
Good
|
Substandard
|
Failure
|
Writing Mechanics
|
1.5 points
Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English using paragraphs and sentence rather than bullets, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No contractions or jargon used. Zero to two errors noted.
(1.35 - 1.5)
|
1.275 points
Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Three to six errors noted.
(1.2 - 1.3489)
|
1.125 points
Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Seven to 10 errors noted.
(1.05 - 1.19)
|
0.975 points
Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.
(0.9 - 1.049)
|
0 points
Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.
(0)
|
Criteria 7
|
Outstanding
|
Superior
|
Good
|
Substandard
|
Failure
|
Adherence to APA (6th ed.)
|
0.75 points
One to 2 APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.
(0.675 - 0.75)
|
0.6375 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference list but 3 - 4 APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.
(0.60 - 0.674)
|
0.5625 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document with 5-6 errors noted; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 - 4 times in document.
(0.525 - 0.599)
|
0.4875 points
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 5-6 times; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 5-6 times in document or presents a total of 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper when requires APA citations are needed throughout the document.
(0.45 - 0.524)
|
0 points
No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.
(0 - 0.449)
|
Overall Score
|
Outstanding
13.5 or more
|
Superior
12 or more
|
Good
11.5 or more
|
Substandard
9 or more
|
Failure
0 or mor
|