Rubic_Print_Format
| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points | |||||
| EDL-812 | EDL-812-O500 | Using Data to Lead System Improvements | 250.0 | |||||
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (85.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Criteria | 100.0% | |||||||
| Discussion of the Differences in the Use of Data | 20.0% | No discussion of the differences in the use of data is presented. | A discussion of the differences in the use of data is presented but is incomplete or inaccurate. Information presented is not based on scholarly sources. | A discussion of the differences in the use of data is presented but is cursory and lacking in depth. Information presented is from both non-scholarly and scholarly sources. | A discussion of the differences in the use of data is present and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A discussion of the differences in the use of data is thoroughly presented with rich detail. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | ||
| Discussion of the Manner in which Data Is Used Collaboratively | 25.0% | No discussion of the manner in which data is used collaboratively is presented. | A discussion of the manner in which data is used collaboratively is presented but is inaccurate or illogical. Information presented is not based on scholarly sources. | A discussion of the manner in which data is used collaboratively is presented but is cursory and lacking in depth. Information presented is from both non-scholarly and scholarly sources. | A discussion of the manner in which data is used collaboratively is present and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A discussion of the manner in which data is used collaboratively is thoroughly presented with rich detail. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | ||
| Discussion of how the Prioritized Needs and Opportunities could be Communicated | 25.0% | No discussion of how the prioritized needs and opportunities could be communicated is presented. | A discussion of how the prioritized needs and opportunities could be communicated is presented but is inaccurate or illogical. Information presented is not based on scholarly sources. | A discussion of how the prioritized needs and opportunities could be communicated is presented but is cursory and lacking in depth. Information presented is from both non-scholarly and scholarly sources. | A discussion of how the prioritized needs and opportunities could be communicated is present and thorough. Information presented is from scholarly though dated sources. | A discussion of how the prioritized needs and opportunities could be communicated is thoroughly presented with rich detail. Information presented is from current scholarly sources. | ||
| Synthesis and Argument | 10.0% | No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources. | Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing, presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | ||
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 10.0% | Presentation lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the presentation. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the presentation is contained within the thesis. | ||
| Mechanics of Writing | 5.0% | Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | ||
| APA Format | 5.0% | Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used. | Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used. | Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present. | Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. | The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. | ||
| Total Weightage | 100% |
Get help from top-rated tutors in any subject.
Efficiently complete your homework and academic assignments by getting help from the experts at homeworkarchive.com