Excellent Good
(85 – 100%) (70 – 85%)
Content and Postings provide comprehensive
Creativity insight and reflective thought
about the topic by building a
 40% of total score focused argument around a
specific issue making an
oppositional statement
supported by personal
experience or related research.
Reader Postings are written in a style
Engagement that is appealing and appropriate
for the intended audience and a
consistent voice is evident
throughout.
 20% of total score
Text Layout, Use Selects and inserts high quality
of Graphics and graphics and multimedia when
Multimedia appropriate to enhance the
content’s visual appeal and
increase readability.
 20% of total score
Quality of Writing Written responses are free of
and Proofreading grammatical, spelling or
punctuation errors.  The style of
 5% of total score writing facilitates
communication.  generally facilitates
Departmentof Management & HR
Blog writing Grading Rubric
Satisfactory
(65 – 70%)
Postings provide moderate
insight, understanding and
reflective thought about the
topic.
Postings are written in a
style that is generally
appropriate for the
intended audience and an
attempt is made to use a
consistent voice.
Selects and inserts graphics
and multimedia that are
mostly high quality and
enhance and clarify the
content.
Written responses are
largely free of grammatical,
spelling or punctuation
errors.  The style of writing
communication.
Assessment Rubrics
Needs Improvement
(65% and below)
Postings provide minimal
insight, understanding and
reflective thought about the
topic.
Postings are written in a
style that does not fully
consider the audience, and
the author’s voice is difficult
to identify.
Selects and inserts many
low-quality graphics and
multimedia which do not
enhance the content.
Written responses include
some grammatical, spelling
or punctuation errors that
distract the reader.  or punctuation errors.
Postings show no
evidence of insight,
understanding or
reflective thought
about the topic.
Postings do not reflect
an awareness of the
audience and it is
difficult to identify the
author’s voice.
Does not insert any
graphics, or uses only
low-quality graphics
and multimedia, which
do not enhance the
content.
Written responses
contain numerous
grammatical, spelling
 
The style of writing
does not facilitate
good communication.
 CRITERION STRONG
25% Identifies and demonstrates a
Identification of Main sophisticated understanding of the
main issues/problems in the case
Issues / Problems
study.
35% Presents an insightful and thorough
Analysis and Evaluation analysis of all identified
issues/problems; includes all
of Issues / Problems
necessary calculations.
20% Supports diagnosis and opinions with
Recommendations / strong arguments and well
documented evidence; presents a
Implementation Plan
balanced and critical view;
interpretation is both reasonable and
objective.
10% Makes appropriate and powerful
Links to Course Readings connections between identified
issues/ problems and the strategic
and Additional Research
concepts studied in the course
readings and lectures; supplements
case study with relevant and
thoughtful research and documents all
sources of information
10% Demonstrates clarity, conciseness and
Writing Mechanics and correctness; formatting is appropriate
and writing is free of grammar and
Formatting Guidelines
spelling errors.
Case Study Grading Rubric
Written Report Grading Rubric
AVERAGE
Identifies and demonstrates an
accomplished understanding of
most of the issues/problems.
Presents a thorough analysis of
most of the issues identified;
missing some necessary
calculations.
Supports diagnosis and opinions
with limited reasoning and
evidence; presents a somewhat
one-sided argument; demonstrates
little engagement with ideas
presented.
Makes appropriate but somewhat
vague connections between
identified issues/problems and
concepts studied in readings and
lectures; demonstrates limited
command of the analytical tools
studied; supplements case study
with limited research.
Occasional grammar or spelling
errors, but still a clear presentation
of ideas; lacks organization
WEAK
Identifies and demonstrates
acceptable understanding of some of
the issues/problems in the case
study.
Presents a superficial or incomplete
analysis of some of the identified
issues; omits necessary calculations.
Little or no action suggested and/or
inappropriate solutions proposed to
the issues in the case study.
Makes inappropriate or little
connection between issues identified
and the concepts studied in the
readings; supplements case study, if
at all, with incomplete research and
documentation.
Writing is unfocused, rambling, or
contains serious errors; poorly
organized and does not follow
specified guidelines.
 Criteria Exemplary Proficient Below Expectations
>85% 70 – 85% < 70%
Reasoning and Clear and accurate answers; Reasons support answers with some / Weak reasons and/or irrelevant or
Analysis insightful, specific. an important reason(s) overlooked; confusing reasons given that don't
general examination and assessment. support the answers; incomplete
35% of Score answers.

Focus on Topic Answers address the questions clearly The answers are not as detailed Some of the documentation relates to
and fully, showing higher level and/or concise as needed; and/ or use the assigned topic; misuses or uses
25% of Score analysis and synthesis of concepts and limited course vocabulary. limited course vocabulary.
uses course vocabulary.

Accuracy of All facts are accurate and relate back
Facts and Citations to the answer. Provided 2-5 citations
throughout paper using the text,
20% of Score interview and or other related
documentation.
All facts are accurate and relate back No direct quotes or "work consulted"
to the answer, yet there was a used or referred to in the paper.
disproportionate amount of opinion Incorrect facts and / or citations.
based statements then facts. Provided
2-5 citations throughout paper using
the text, interview and or other
related documentation.

Mechanics/ Use of correct grammar, spelling, and
Organization punctuation; well organized; one idea
follows another in a logical sequence
20% of Score with clear transitions; questions
stated before answers; format easy to
navigate.
Enough errors to distract the reader; Numerous errors, paper hard to read;
organization problems; questions not questions are not stated before
stated before answers; and / or answers; format details are not
format difficult to navigate. adhered to.

Student Presentation Rubric

Criteria Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent

Organization Audience cannot
understand presentation
25% of Score because there is no
sequence of information
Subject Student does not have grasp
Knowledge of information; student
cannot answer questions
35% of Score about subject
Quality of Presentation has four or
Visual Aids more spelling errors and/or
grammatical errors. Poor or
15% of Score no graphics used
Elocution Student mumbles,
incorrectly pronounces
15% of Score terms, and speaks to quietly
for students in the back of
class to hear
Eye Contact& Student reads all of report
Body Language with no eye contact
10% of Score
Audience has difficulty
following presentation
because student jumps
around
Student is uncomfortable
with information and is able
to answer only rudimentary
questions
Presentation has three
misspellings and/or
grammatical errors.
Occasional graphics used
Student’s voice is low.
Student incorrectly
pronounces some terms.
Audience members have
difficulty hearing
Student occasionally uses
eye contact, but still reads
most of report
Student presents
information in logical
sequence which audience
can follow
Student is at ease with
expected answers to all
questions, but fails to
elaborate
Presentation has no more
than two misspellings and/
or grammatical errors.
Graphics relate to text and
presentation
Student’s voice is clear.
Student pronounces most
words correctly. Most
audience members can hear
Student maintains eye
contact most of the time but
frequently returns to notes
Student presents information
in logical, interesting sequence
which the audience can follow
Student demonstrate full
knowledge (more than
required) by answering all
class questions with
explanations and elaboration
Presentation has no
misspellings or grammatical
errors. Graphics explain and
reinforce screen text and
presentation
Student uses a clear voice and
correct, precise pronunciation
of terms so that all audience
members can hear
Student maintains eye contact
with audience , seldom
returning to notes
 Online/In-Class Participation/Preparation Rubric
Behavior Student is awake and engaged in Student is awake and engaged in Student is awake most of the time but Student frequently sleeps
class on a daily basis. Student class nearly every day, and shows has fallen asleep or has been distracting and/or disrupts class.
shows no disruptive behavior. no disruptive behavior. for a few classes.

Always= every single day Often= 2-3 times per week

Usually= on most days Sometimes= 1-2 times/ month
Frequently= 4+ times per week Rarely= 1-2 times per quarter
 LMS Discussion Forum Participation/Preparation Rubric

Excellent Good Fair Poor No Credit/No

100 points 80 points 60 points 40 points Submission

Content Discussion postings Discussion postings Discussion Discussion postings do Student did not
50 % actively stimulate contribute to the class' postings not contribute to attempt activity
and sustain further ongoing conversations sometimes ongoing conversations
discussion by as evidenced by contribute to or respond to peers'
building on peers' stimulating additional ongoing postings. There is no
responses including discussion with limited conversations as evidence of replies to
— affirming supporting experience evidenced by questions.
statements or or research stimulating =================
references to ================ additional Discussion postings are
relevant research Discussion postings discussion with at midpoint or later in
or respond to most limited the week/module or
— asking related postings of peers within supporting contributions are only
questions or, a 48 hour period. experience or posted on the last day of
— making an research. the module.
oppositional
statement
supported by any
personal
experience or
related research.
Attitude & Etiquette Written Written interactions on Some of the Written interactions on Student did not
20 % interactions on the the discussion forum written the discussion forum attempt activity
discussion forum show respect and interactions on show disrespect for the
show respect, interest in the the discussion viewpoints of others.
interest, and viewpoints of others. board show
sensitivity to peers' respect and
gender, cultural interest in the
and linguistic viewpoints of
background. others.
Quality of Written responses Written responses are Written Written responses Student did not
Writing/Proofreading are free of largely free of responses include contain numerous attempt activity
20 % grammatical, grammatical, spelling or some grammatical, spelling or
 spelling or
punctuation errors.
The style of writing
facilitates
communication.
Timeliness/Frequency Meets posting All required posts with
10 % timeline guidelines no more than one late.
in syllabus or
special assignment.
- Points are awarded “Per Forum Post”.
- 100 points = 1 mark
Criteria Below Expectations
Reasoning and Weak reasons and/or
Analysis irrelevant or confusing
reasons given that don't
40% support the answers;
incomplete answers.
Focus on Topic Some of the documentation
relates to the assigned topic;
20 % misuses or uses limited course
vocabulary.
punctuation errors. The grammatical, punctuation errors. The
style of writing spelling or style of writing does not
generally facilitates punctuation facilitate effective
communication. errors that communication.
distract the
reader.
All required posts Missing required posts Student did not
with several late and/or all late. attempt activity.
or missing
required posts.
Writing Assignment Rubric
Proficient Exemplary
Reasons support answers with some / an Clear and accurate answers; insightful,
important reason(s) overlooked; general specific.
examination and assessment.
The answers are not as detailed and/or concise as Answers address the questions clearly and
needed; and/ or use limited course vocabulary. fully, showing higher level analysis and
synthesis of concepts and uses course
vocabulary.
Accuracy of No direct quotes or "work All facts are accurate and relate back to the All facts are accurate and relate back to
Facts and consulted" used or referred to answer, yet there was a disproportionate amount the answer. Provided 2-5 citations
Citations in the paper. Incorrect facts of opinion based statements then facts. Provided throughout paper using the text,
and / or citations. 2-5 citations throughout paper using the text, interview and or other related
10% interview and or other related documentation. documentation.

Mechanics/ Numerous errors, paper hard
Organization to read; questions are not
stated before answers; format
10 % details are not adhered to.
Enough errors to distract the reader; organization
problems; questions not stated before answers;
and / or format difficult to navigate.
Use of correct grammar, spelling, and
punctuation; well organized; one idea
follows another in a logical sequence with
clear transitions; questions stated before
answers; format easy to navigate.

Article Review Rubrics

Criteria Exemplary Effective Minimal Unsatisfactory

Content of In depth and well organized Content is adequately Content is minimally Content is not organized
content organized and comprehensive organized Length requirement is not
Review
Meets length requirement Length requirement is met Length requirement is not met; poor content
50% with quality content with adequate content met; minimal content Incomplete summary
Excellent summary Adequate summary Basic summary Evidence of plagiarism
Appropriate Relevant to assigned subject Relevant to assigned subject Minimal relevance to assigned Not relevant to assigned
Topic matter and peer interest matter subject matter subject matter
Article content exceeds Article content meets Article content fails to meet Fails to meet content
25% requirements expectations all requirements requirements

Article has great significance Article has some significance Article has little significance Article has no significance
Student summary exceeds Student summary meets Summary meets minimal Summary does not meet
Significance to average peer perspective and project expectations expectations minimal expectations
Class / understanding Some understanding of Little understanding of No understanding of article’s
Relativity to Student displays article’s relevance to topic article’s relevance to topic relevance
understanding of article’s
Class
relevance to topic
15%

Article Article formatted well Article formatted above Article attached to summary No article
Submission Display of article includes average Partial documentation of
correct citation Display of article includes article
10% correct citation