Case Analysis Rubric Fall 2020

Best Available Writers

Case_Analysis

Introduction (10%)
Superior (9.0-10%) Above Average (8.0-8.9%) Average (7.0-7.9%) Below Average (6.0-6.9%) Failure (less than 6.0%) %
Thoroughly reflective and evidence-based. Above and beyond instructor expectations. Highly reliable; no or minimal explanation required. High degree of validity; assessment requirements are clearly met or exceeded. Acceptably reflective and evidence-based. Above instructor expectations. Above average reliability; acceptable amount of explanation may be required. Above average degree of validity; assessment requirements clearly met. Minimally reflective and evidence-based. Meets instructor expectations. Average reliability; some explanation would be required. Average degree of validity; assessment requirements are minimally met. Reflection below average. Not supported by credible sources. Does not meet expections. Below average reliability; extensive explanation required. Unacceptable degree of validity; does not meet assessment requirements. No reflection is evident. No credible sources. Not reliable; student could not provide an explanation. Fails to demonstrate validity; does not meet assessment requirements.
0
Problem Statement (20%)
Superior (18.0-20%) Above Average (16.0-17.9%) Average (14.0-15.9%) Below Average (12.0-13.9%) Failure (less than 12.0%) %
Comprehensively identifies and isolates one specific problem. Identifies factors contributing to the problem with accurate details. Substantiates problem statement with external source(s). Identifies and isolates one specific problem. Identifies some factors contributing to the problem with accurate details. Substantiates problem statement with external source(s). Identifies and isolates a problem with some evidence of contributing factors. May be lacking substantive support of the problem statement. Uses assumptions and has missing information that are not revealed and addressed at any level. Writing generally shows minimal evidence the student has done the required research and analysis, consisting instead of opinions, feelings and impressions. Writing generally shows no evidence the student has done the required research and analysis, consisting instead of opinions, feelings and impressions.
0
.
Significance of the Problem (20%)
Superior (18.0-20%) Above Average (16.0-17.9%) Average (14.0-15.9%) Below Average (12.0-13.9%) Failure (less than 12.0%) %
Clearly establishes problem significance. Argument based on relevant concepts, theories, and frameworks. Outcome predictions support immediate action. Identifies outside sources of support. Establishes problem significance. Well-supported argument based on relevant concepts, theories, and frameworks. Outcome predictions support immediate action while using some outside sources of support. A valid argument with at least some reference to relevant concepts, theories and/or frameworks is present; exhibits thoughtfulness; makes some effort towards predicting outcomes. Arguments presented, if any, are mostly from opinion and not from evidence; while containing little linkage to relevant concepts, theories and/or frameworks. Arguments presented, if any, are from opinion and not from evidence; while containing no linkage to relevant concepts, theories and/or frameworks.
0
Alternative Actions (20%)
Superior (18.0-20%) Above Average (16.0-17.9%) Average (14.0-15.9%) Below Average (12.0-13.9%) Failure (less than 12.0%) %
Thorough approach to problem resolution. Rationale for alternatives clearly articulated. Insightful advantages, disadvantage thoroughly support implementation alternative actions. Decision could be made based upon information provided. Realistic approach to problem resolution. Rationale for alternatives provided. Advantages, disadvantages give cause to consider either one or the other alternative actions. Decision probably could be made with information provided. An approach to problem resolution provided. Rationale for alternatives is provided. Advantages, disadvantages are present. Outcome of implementing alternatives is not clear. Decision could possibly be made based on information provided. Problem resolution is not clear. Rationale, advantages/disadvantages are not complete or do not support the analysis. A decision based upon either alternative would be difficult to make without a great deal of additional information. No problem resolution is present. Rationale, advantages, disadvantages are not present, incomplete, or incoherent. A decision based upon either alternative would be not be possible.
0
Recommendation (10%)
Superior (9.0-10%) Above Average (8.0-8.9%) Average (7.0-7.9%) Below Average (6.0-6.9%) Failure (less than 6.0%) %
Creative resolution. Rationale clear, supportive. Advantage, disadvantage balanced, substantiate objective analysis; separate, distinctly different from either Alternative Action. Challenges either Alternative. Enables decision. Creative resolution. Rationale is supportive. Advantage, disadvantage balance analysis; different from Alternative Actions. Presents a challenge to Alternatives. Decision could be made solely based upon the information provided. Somewhat creative approach. Rationale stated. Advantage, disadvantage mostly balanced; different than Alternatives. Recommendation may replace one or the other Alternative Action. Decision would require additional information, explanation. Minimally creative. Rationale not clear. Advantage, disadvantage not balanced, not distinctly different than Alternatives, fail to provide an objective solution to the problem. Would not replace either Alternative Action. Decision not possible. No problem resolution is present. Rationale, advantage, disadvantage are not present, incomplete, or incoherent. A decision would not be not be possible.
0
Mechanics (10%)
Superior (9.0-10%) Above Average (8.0-8.9%) Average (7.0-7.9%) Below Average (6.0-6.9%) Failure (less than 6.0%) %
Uses proper APA citations and references; grammatically-sound and free of spelling errors, follows required formatting rules; and fully addresses given assignment. Proper use APA with few errors found. Above average grammatically, mostly free of spelling errors, follows required formatting rules; and fully addresses given assignment. Citations are sometimes missing and/or are incorrect; an acceptable level of writing is exhibited, even with mistakes, the communication is clear. Very little support of citation; grammar, spelling, and/or word choice errors are frequent enough that the communication is muddled. The analysis is jeopardized by the extent of errors. Lack of any sort of citation. Grammar, spelling, and/or word choice errors are frequent enough that the analysis is incomprehensible. The extent of errors renders the analysis incomprehensible.
0
Course Learning Objectives (CLOs) (10%)
Superior (9.0-10%) Above Average (8.0-8.9%) Average (7.0-7.9%) Below Average (6.0-6.9%) Failure (less than 6.0%) %
Thoroughly accomplished all aspects of the three CLOs for the AVM 4302 Aviation Law. Significantly accomplished all aspects of the three CLOs for the AVM 4302 Aviation Law. Average accomplishment of all three CLOs for the AVM 4302 Aviation Law. Did not satisfactorily accomplish all three CLOs, poor quality. Only __ CLOs were addressed. Did not accomplish an acceptable degree of the three CLOs, did not demonstrate an acceptable level of comprehension. Only __ CLOs were addressed.
0
0

Section 1 &”Times New Roman,Bold”&14AVS 4302 Case Analysis Rubric Fall 2020

Best Available Writers