MGT5MPT: Assessment 3 marking rubric Exploring the Paradigm Wars (essay)
CRITERIA
Excellent (> 80 %) Very good (70 – 79%) Good (60 – 69%) Acceptable (50 – 59%) Unacceptable (<50%)
Summary of theories
(35% of total mark)
☐ Excellent summary of the key points of each of the four theories discussed, drawing on the work of the key theorists.
(28-35 marks)
☐ Very good summary of the key points of each of the four theories discussed, drawing on the work of the key theorists.
(25-27 marks)
☐ Good summary of the key points of each of the four theories discussed, partly drawing on the work of the key theorists.
(21-24 marks)
☐ Fair summary of the key points of each of the four theories discussed, little reference to the work of the key theorists. (18-20 marks)
☐ Poor or missing summary of key points of the relevant theories.
(<17 marks)
Critical analysis
(30% of total mark)
☐ Excellent critical and insightful analysis of each of the four theories; Clearly demonstrates the contribution of each to our understanding of organisational action.
(24-30 marks)
☐ Very good critical analysis of each of the four theories; Demonstrates the contribution of each to our understanding of organisational action.
(21-23 marks)
☐ Good analysis of each of the four theories; Good attempt to demonstrate the contribution of each to our understanding of organisational action.
(18-20 marks)
☐ Fair analysis of each of the four theories; Little or no attempt to demonstrate the contributions of each theory to our understanding of organisational action. (15-17 marks)
☐ Little or no attempt at critically analysing the theories.
(<15 marks)
Conclusion
(15% of total mark)
☐ Excellent conclusion; discusses whether reconciliation of theories into a unified understanding is possible; Clearly identifies the complexities in creating a universal theory of organisation.
(12-15 marks)
☐ Very good conclusion; discusses whether reconciliation into a unified understanding is possible; Identifies the complexities in creating a universal theory of organisation.
(11-12 marks)
☐ Good conclusion; discusses whether reconciliation into a unified understanding is possible; Fair attempt to identify the complexities in creating a universal theory of organisation.
(8-10 marks)
☐ Fair conclusion; Good attempt to discuss whether reconciliation into a unified understanding is possible; Fails to clearly identify the complexities in creating a universal theory of organisation. (7-8 marks)
☐ Poor or missing discussion about potential reconciliation of different theories
(<7 marks)
Structure and organisation
(10% of total mark)
☐ Sequence and structure are logical and easy to follow; excellent overall organisation. Powerful connections between different sections; clear and concise focus throughout.
(8-10 marks)
☐ Sequence and structure are logical and easy to follow; good overall organisation.
(7 marks)
☐ Structured well enough to make sense; could be better organised and more tightly focused upon the main topic, may lack focus, engagement or summary.
(6 marks)
☐ Mostly coherent organisation; may have some sections where difficult to follow reasoning. Could be more clearly and logically organised.
(5 marks)
☐ Lacks coherent organisation and structure. Difficult to follow reasoning. Describes disconnected bits of information or many direct quotes.
(< 5 marks)
Writing and referencing
(10% of total mark)
☐ Excellent use of relevant and appropriate sources of literature. Correct referencing used throughout. Excellent grammar and spelling.
(8-10 marks)
☐ Very good use of relevant and appropriate sources of literature. Correct referencing, and good grammar and spelling.
(7 marks)
☐ Good use of relevant and appropriate sources of literature
(6 marks)
☐ Good use of relevant sources of literature. Mostly correct referencing. Some grammar and spelling errors.
(5 marks)
☐ Few if any literature sources included and poor referencing. Poor spelling and grammar.
(< 5 marks)