CASE STUDY RUBRIC

Assessor Name
Programme PGDPM Module Project Scope and Schedule Management
Module NQF 8 Year 2021
Assessment Type ASSIGNMENT Case Study Main PROJECT

Number Question Guideline Mark Allocation

CASE STUDY 100
INSTRUCTIONS
QUESTION 1 Define “project slippage” and state what the main reason Define project slippage 25
was for it in the case study. Advise Reichart on generic Give reasons for slippage
Make reference to relevant theory and the case study.
methods that may be engaged in for future projects in
Provide solutions to deal with project slippage.
another company to prevent schedule slippage.

QUESTION 2 “The main concern of corporate was to get the project back Identify correct method referred to. 25
on schedule.” With reference to this statement, discuss a
Discuss method using examples.
method you would apply to bring this project back on
course by undertaking activities concurrently and method Make reference to relevant theory and to case study.
you would apply to bring this project back on course at an
increased cost.
QUESTION 3 Critically discuss the advantages and disadvantages of List and discuss advantages with examples. 25
fasttracking a project as a means of dealing with the .

project schedule slippage in the article.

QUESTION 4 Discuss in detail the advantages and disadvantages of List and discuss disadvantages with examples 25
crashing a project as a means of dealing with the project
schedule slippage in the article.

1
GRADING/MARKING SCALE
The following scale will guide and assist the marker to award a mark for each question, identifying characteristics of a good response at the required
NQF level
Poor
0-49%
COGNITIVE Inadequate to limited information
base.
ABILITIES Lack of understanding of key
issues and research skills.
Weak academic/intellectual skills
CONTENT Inadequate or limited evidence of
relevant literature
ARGUMENT/ANALYS Basic knowledge of key
issues/concepts.
IS Limited research skills and
problem solving skills.
Largely descriptive with restricted
synthesis and little or no
argument.
SYNTAX AND USAGE Inadequate and poor presentation
of work (e.g.
bibliography/reference list and in-
text referencing, style, accurate
grammar etc.)
Acceptable
50 - 59%
Basic/satisfactory knowledge
of key issues/concepts.
Descriptive in part however
some ability to demonstrate
synthesis.
Limited evidence of creativity
of thought.
Demonstrates Mastery of an
adequate body of relevant
literature
Demonstrates adequate
organisation of content and a
coherent argument.
Descriptive, with ability to
develop conceptual structures
and arguments.
Reasonable presentation of
work (e.g.
bibliography/reference list and
in-text referencing, style,
accurate grammar etc.)
Achieved
60 – 74%
Demonstrates a good
analysis of key issues and
concepts.
Good development of
conceptual structures.
Demonstrates good
evidence of creativity of
thought, evidence of
knowledge.
Demonstrates Mastery of a
substantial relevant
literature
Demonstrates evidence of
comprehensive
understanding of the
knowledge acquired.
Evidence of good
application of information
from the range of relevant
sources.
Good presentation of work
(e.g. bibliography/reference
list and in-text referencing,
style, accurate grammar
etc.)
Exemplary
75%
Demonstrates a high level of
intellectual rigour.
Excellent academic/intellectual
skills.
Considerable creativity and
originality.
Demonstrates Mastery of a
substantial relevant literature
Demonstrates independence of
thought.
High level of intellectual rigour
and consistency.
Excellent expressive skills and
originality.
Demonstrates a wide breadth of
knowledge and its application
Excellent presentation or
work(e.g. bibliography/reference
list and in-text referencing, style,
accurate grammar etc.)