T1 2017 MPM731 Assignment 3 Getting the Message Across Rubric Criteria Unacceptable/Not attempted Needs improvement Acceptable Good Very good Excellent Communication (GLO2) – effective structure and presentation of written messages within word limits; accurate referencing context for the communication strategy with rational and aims; – effective layout and design of the messages. (5 marks). 0.7 points Always uses inappropriate and/or irrelevant content to develop and explore basic ideas and presents an unacceptable exposition of complex knowledge and ideas. Unclear and confusing context that lacks logical rationale for choice of media. Written messages are inaccurate, misleading or superficial use of information. Language is poor and makes comprehension of the business case difficult. Referencing is both limited and poor and does not support – or contradicts the business case. Always uses basic English marred by errors that frequently impede meaning. This impacts extensively on the overall comprehension of knowledge and ideas. (0‐1.4 marks) 2 points Mostly uses inappropriate and / or irrelevant content to develop and explore basic ideas and presents unclear and incoherent exposition of complex knowledge and ideas for the need for a communications strategy and lack of rationale for choice of media. Written messages are lacking in substance and authority. Language is problematic, causing business case to lack conviction and professionalism. Referencing is poor and does not serve to support or justify business case. Mostly uses basic English marred by errors that frequently impede meaning. This impacts considerably on the overall comprehension of knowledge and ideas. (1.5‐2.4 marks) 2.7 points Moderately uses appropriate, relevant content to illustrate understanding of the subject or topic and presents moderately clear knowledge and ideas. Moderately defined context for the need for a communications strategy and good rationale for choice of media. Written messages are adequate, but inconsistent, raising questions relating to business case logic. Language is problematic, with errors in expression and argument detracting from appreciation of business case. Referencing is adequate but lacks contemporary relevance and authority. Satisfactorily uses advanced, graceful English that expertly conveys meaning with clarity and fluency. This impacts somewhat on the comprehension of knowledge and ideas. (2.5‐2.9 marks) 3.2 points Mostly uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate mastery of the subject or topic and presents a clear, coherent, independent and professional exposition of complex knowledge and ideas. Mostly defined context for the need for a communications strategy and very good rationale for choice of media. Written messages are reasonably concise and fluent. Some flaws logic in flow and structure. Good evidence of reference sources being used to substantiate business case, although relevance and authority of sources leaves room for improvement. Competently uses advanced, graceful English that expertly conveys meaning with clarity and fluency. This impacts at times on the comprehension of knowledge and ideas. (3‐3.4 marks) 3.7 points Consistently uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate a mastery of the subject or topic and generates original knowledge and understanding, making a substantial contribution to a discipline or area of professional practice. Written messages are clear, concise and fluent. Professional and articulate use of language. Logical flow and structure. Relevant and contemporary reference sources used to substantiate business case. Consistently uses sophisticated English that skillfully communicates meaning with clarity and fluency, and is almost virtually error‐free. This allows the knowledge and ideas to be consistently demonstrated. (3.5‐3.9 marks) 5 points Consistently and effectively uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate a mastery of the subject or topic and generates original knowledge and understanding, making a very substantial contribution to a discipline or area of professional practice. Written messages are very clear, comprehensive, concise and fluent. Dynamic and persuasive use of language. Logical flow and structure. Relevant and contemporary reference sources used to substantiate business case. Consistently uses graceful and sophisticated English that skillfully communicates meaning with high level of clarity and fluency, and is virtually error‐free. This allows the knowledge and ideas to be effectively communicated throughout. (4‐5 marks)