MGMT20140 ASSESSMENT ITEM 1 – MARKING RUBRIC
In case of high Turnitin similarity scores, markers analyse the similarity score on a case by case basis and you will see relevant comments in your assignment, if necessary. If high similarity derived purely from reference lists and/or the fact that you may have copied the assessment brief into your submission, no comments are made as you can find this information out yourself by exploring the similarity score on your Turnitin report.
Late submission penalties are being applied to this assignment as per the university regulations.
Any students deemed to have conducted Academic Misconduct are being reported and will be informed of the outcome of the investigation and any related penalties via their student email address.
Criteria / 0 (Not Shown) / 1 (Poor) / 2 (Unsatisfactory) / 3 (Satisfactory) / 4 (Good) / 5 (Very Good) / 6 (Excellent)1. Demonstrate understanding of Design Thinking by providing correct information, which is distinguished clearly from own opinion.
20% / No understanding demonstrated. Poster content ishighly incorrect, and/or irrelevant for the topic or poster is purely opinion-based. / Information on the poster is incorrect and/or irrelevant for the topic. Poster content may be overly based on own opinion to demonstrate understanding. / Information on the poster is incorrect and/or irrelevant for the topic. Poster content may be overly based on own opinion to demonstrate understanding. / Poster content demonstrates basic understanding. Information on the poster may not be fully correct and/or relevant for the topic and/or difference between literature and own opinion is not fully clear. / Poster content demonstrates understanding. Information on the poster is generally relevant and correct but may contain omissions, errors of judgment and/or unclear distinction between literature and own opinion. / Poster content demonstrates very good understanding. Information on the poster is almost entirely relevant and correct and the distinction between literature and own opinion is fairly clear. / Poster content demonstrates excellent understanding. Information on the poster is entirely relevant and correct. The distinction between literature and own opinion is clearly highlighted.
2. Demonstrate synthesis and summarizing skills by displaying a clear and concise message on the poster.
20% / No message on the poster. / Failure to demonstrate synthesis and summarizing skills. Poster message is unclear because it is insufficient or because it is confused, overly expansive and not concise. / Failure to demonstrate synthesis and summarizing skills. Poster message is unclear because it is insufficient or because it is confused, overly expansive and not concise. / Attempt at synthesizing and summarizing: message is not entirely clear to the viewer and/or message is not entirely concise. / Synthesis and summarising skills demonstrated: viewers can understand the message although it may require some clarification. Generally concise message. / Good synthesis and summarising skills demonstrated: viewers can understand the message without requiring further clarification. Generally concise message. / Message is entirely clear and concisely presented. There is no need for viewers to gain clarification.
3. Ability to effectively use structure, aesthetics and layout on the poster.
20% / No discernible attempt to use structure, aesthetics and layout. / Failure to design an effective poster. Inappropriate or highly unsuitable use of structure, aesthetics and/or layout. An unengaging and not aesthetically pleasing poster. / Failure to design an effective poster. Inappropriate or unsuitable use of structure, aesthetics and/or layout. An unengaging and not aesthetically pleasing poster. / A reasonable attempt to design a poster, which could be more effective. Structure, aesthetics and/or layout are not entirely appropriate or suitable.Poster is only somewhat engaging and aesthetically pleasing. / A well designed and generally effective poster. There may be inconsistencies and/or unsuitable elements in structure, aesthetics and/or layout. Generally engaging and aesthetically pleasing. / A well designed and effective poster. Structure, aesthetics and layout are all appropriate and suitable but could be more engaging and aesthetically pleasing. / An exceptional poster: highly effective, engaging and aesthetically pleasing in terms of structure, aesthetics and layout.
4. Ability to present the poster, within a given time limit, in a cohesive and engaging manner, without being a verbatim repeat of the poster.
20% / No voice-over presentation submitted. / Presentation is substantially out of the time limit (2-3 minutes); and/or presentation is in-cohesive and or/or unengaging; and/or student reads out the poster in verbatim manner. / Presentation is somewhat out of the time limit (2-3 minutes); and/or presentation is in-cohesive and or/or unengaging; and/or student reads out the poster in almost-verbatim manner. / Presentation is within the time limit (2-3 minutes); and basic attempt at cohesive and engaging presentation is made; and presentation somewhat differs from the poster. / Presentation is within the time limit (2-3 minutes); and presentation is somewhat cohesive and engaging; and presentation differs from the poster. / Presentation is within the time limit (2-3 minutes); and presentation is generally cohesive and engaging; and presentation is clearly different from the poster. / Excellent coherent and highly engaging delivery suitable for professional poster presentations; clearly within the time limit (2-3 minutes); presentation differs significantly from the poster.
5. Breadth and quality of research, using a minimum of 5 academic sources.
10% / No academic sources used.
Possible Academic Misconduct case. / Limited amount of academic sources (<5) and/or use of poor quality inappropriate sources. Some may be fictional or irrelevant. / Limited amount of academic sources (<5) and/or use of poor quality inappropriate sources. Some may be fictional or irrelevant. / Five suitable sources used, which may include a couple of poorer quality sources (e.g. websites; lecture notes). / A body (>5) of generally high-quality and appropriate sources, which may include small omissions and/or errors of judgment. / A body (>5) of almost entirely high-quality and appropriate sources. / An extensive body (every claim is referenced) of purely high-quality and highly appropriate academic sources.
6. Correct use of the APA referencing system.
10% / No use of the APA referencing system in the assignment, or the reference list with no correctly cited sources. / Very poor use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and/or in the reference list, with incorrectly cited sources. / Unsatisfactory use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and/or in the reference list, with few correctly cited sources. / Satisfactory use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list; mistakes and/or omissions present. / Competent use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list; generally correctly cited sources but small omissions and/or errors of judgment may be present. / Very good use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list with almost entirely correctly cited sources. / Faultless use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list with completely correctly cited sources.