IBU5HRM: Assessment 2 marking rubric STUDENT NAME: CRITERIA Excellent (> 80 %) Very good (70 – 79%) Good (60 – 69%) Fair (50 – 59%) Poor (<50%) MARK Presentation Quality (25% of total mark) ☐ Excellent PowerPoint Presentation, with well-designed slides and appropriate narrated explanations, displaying considerable initiative and originality and a deep appreciation of the topic; Each group member is introduced and contributes outstandingly to the narration. (21-25 marks) ☐ Well-developed PowerPoint Presentation; well-designed slides, and narration demonstrates very good engagement, interest and understanding of the topic; Each group member is introduced and contributes to the narration. (18-20 marks) ☐ Above average PowerPoint Presentation, with good slides preparation, and narration is interesting, relevant and engaging. Reasonably good introduction of all members of the group, and all members contribute to the narration. (15-17 marks) ☐ Basic PowerPoint Presentation, adequately prepared and with material provided with assisted to class engagement with the presentation topic; Adequate introduction and involvement of all members of the group. (13-14 marks) ☐ Poor PowerPoint Presentation – poorlyprepared slides, with poor or missing narration. Poor introduction and/or involvement of members of the group. (<12 marks) /25 Presentation Content with a focus on an Planned Activity (including literature support), relating one IHRM area (25% of total mark) ☐ Case Study organisation identified, with excellent explanation of IHRM activity; extremely well developed planned activity linked to your topic, displaying considerable initiative and originality; deep appreciation of the relevance to the core concepts of this subject; excellent research well above minimum requirement. (21-25 marks) ☐ Case Study organisation clearly identified and very well explained IHRM activity; very interesting and appropriate planned activity linked to your topic; displays initiative, originality and an appreciation of relevance to the core concepts of this subject; beyond minimum research articles. (18-20 marks) ☐ Case Study organisation identified and reasonably well explained IHRM activity; wellconceived, original and interesting planned activity linked to your topic relevant to the core concepts of the subject; research beyond set references; beyond minimum research articles. (15-17 marks) ☐ Case Study organisation identified and explained area for change; IHRM activity adequately conceived, displaying some originality and relevance to the core concepts of the subject; a reasonable planned activity linked to your topic to engage the entire tutorial class; minimum contemporary (beyond 2006) 15 refereed research articles. (13-14 marks) ☐ Case Study not identified or explained; IHRM activity not identified; topic poorly conceived, insufficiently interesting, original or relevant; Inadequate research and insufficient analysis and interpretation; no solutions or recommendations; no evidence of an planned activity to enhance change– relevant to your topic; less than minimum research articles. (<12 marks) /25 CONTINUED OVER PAGE How would you engage an audience in the workplace? Draw on literature from Presentation Content above (25% of total mark) ☐ Masterfully structured ideas to facilitate the interest of an audience; excellent opportunities to provide for everyone in a given audience to be equally and productively involved; well researched and supported. (21-25 marks) ☐ Well-structured ideas to engage an audience in cooperative inquiry and discussion; ideas will ensure participation of an audience; beyond minimum literature support (18-20 marks) ☐ Workshop developed ideas to involve an audience; effective ways to promote the co-operative inquiry and discussion with a given audience; beyond minimum literature support. (15-17 marks) ☐ Adequate guidelines to engage an audience and minimum references. Minimum references. (13-14 marks) ☐ Poor guiding ideas to engage with an audience and no literature support. (<12 marks) /25 Group Contract (25% of total mark) ☐ Behavioural Contract - excellent student motivations – each student has contributed; outlines the expectations of each Group Member; sets exceptionally well planned ground rules for meetings; stipulates communications between Group Members; identifies the leadership role; provides clear conflict resolution procedures; provides a clear timetable for planned actions; each member has dated and added their names to the Group Contract. (21-25 marks) ☐ Behavioural Contract - provides thorough student motivations; expectations of each Group Member well thought out; sets deliberate ground rules for meetings; stipulates clear and regular communications between Group Members; identifies the leadership role; provides well thought out conflict resolution procedures; provides a timetable for planned actions but somewhat vague; each member has dated and added their names to the Group Contract. (18-20 marks) ☐ Behavioural Contract - provides well thought out student motivations; clearly outlines the expectations of each Group Member; sets clear ground rules for meetings; stipulates clear communications between Group Members; identifies the leadership role; provides conflict resolution procedures; provides a timetable for planned actions but somewhat vague; each member has dated and added their names to the Group Contract. (15-17 marks) ☐ Behavioural Contract - provides student motivations – each student has contributed; outlines the expectations of each Group Member; sets basic ground rules for meetings; stipulates communications between Group Members; identifies the leadership role; provides basic conflict resolution procedures; provides a timetable for planned actions but somewhat vague; each member has dated and added their names to the Group Contract. (13-14 marks) ☐ Behavioural Contract - no evidence of student motivations; poor outline of the expectations of each Group Member; no ground rules set for meetings; does not stipulate communications between Group Members; does not identify the leadership role; unclear conflict resolution procedures; unclear timetable for planned actions; each member has failed to date and added their names to the Group Contract. (<12 marks) /25 Examiner: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: TOTAL MARK /100