Criteria Ratings Points
Topic,domainsandconcepts
35 to >31 pts
Advanced
Clearly addresses thetopic assigned, stays ontopic, evaluates alldomains,comprehensive incontent, uses terms andconcepts from reading,demonstrates clarity ofexpression. Statementsare supported by atleast 1 scholarly sourcepublished within the pastfive years, correctlycited throughout thenarrative.
31 to >28 pts
Proficient
Addresses the topicassigned, stays ontopic, evaluates mostdomains, discussescontent, uses termsand concepts fromreading, anddemonstrates clarity ofexpression. Statementsare supported by atleast 1 scholarly sourcepublished within thepast five years, cited atleast once in thenarrative.
28 to >0 pts
Developing
Does a poor to fair job ofaddressing the topicassigned, stays on topic,evaluates some domains,discusses content, doesnot use terms andconcepts from reading,does not demonstrateclarity of expression.Statements are notsupported by at least 1scholarly sourcepublished within the pastfive years and cited in thenarrative.
0 pts
Not Present
Failing.Student showsevidence ofrefusal orinability toprovide therequiredcontent.
35 pts
WorkHabits
30 to >27 pts
Advanced
Superior work in allareas. Studentconsistently exceedsminimal expectations inall areas regardingcontent analysis,synthesis, andevaluation of topics,participation, timeliness,and writing style.
27 to >24 pts
Proficient
Good work in mostareas. Studentdemonstrates minordeficiencies in someareas regardingcontent, analysis,writing style, and/orparticipation.
24 to >0 pts
Developing
Poor to fair work in mostareas. Student exhibitsneed for improvement inmost areas regardingcontent, analysis, writingstyle, and/or participation.
0 pts
Not Present
Failing.Student showsevidence ofrefusal orinability tomeet minimumstandards ofwork.
30 pts
Personalapplication
5 to >4 pts
Advanced
The student providesthorough applications asa result of his/herprofessional life.
4 to >3 pts
Proficient
The student providesgood applications as aresult of his/herprofessional life.
3 to >0 pts
Developing
The student provides poorto fair applications as aresult of his/herprofessional life.
0 pts
Not Present
The studentprovides zeroapplications asa result ofhis/herprofessionallife.
5 pts
Case Study Grading Rubric | BUSI643_B01_202320
Criteria Ratings Points
APAFormatting
10 to >9 pts
Advanced
APA format followed,organizes content underAPA headings, no largefiller quotes, clearlydoes not plagiarize,clearly finds supportivereasons in reading andapplies them in the casestudy. APA-formattedreference list and in-textcitations are included.
9 to >7 pts
Proficient
APA format followedmost of the time,headings containedsome errors, has nolarge filler quotes, doesnot plagiarize, findssupportive reasons inreading and appliesthem in the case study.Reference list andin-text citations contain2 – 5 errors.
7 to >0 pts
Developing
APA format inconsistentthroughout; missingheadings; some large fillerquotes; does notplagiarize; finds fewsupportive reasons inreading and applies themin the case study;reference list, in-textcitations, and headingscontain more than 5errors.
0 pts
Not Present
APA formatwas notfollowed; largefiller quotespresent; doesnot plagiarize;does not findsupportivereasons inreading orapply them inthe case study;reference listand in-textcitations arenot included.
10 pts
Spelling,GrammarandMechanics
10 to >9 pts
Advanced
The Case Study beginswith a title page and wastyped in 12-point TimesNew Roman fonts on allpages; all pages weredouble-spaced; 1-inchmargins on all four sideswere used.Correct grammar andpunctuation werepresent throughout.Correct spelling andspacing were presentthroughout.The paper was typed ina formal style andwritten in the thirdperson.
9 to >7 pts
Proficient
Some errors with thetitle page, 12-pointTimes New Romanfonts, double-spacing;or 1-inch margins werepresent.Some errors with errorswith one or more of thefollowing were present:• Grammar, and/or;• Punctuation, and/or,• Spelling, and/or;• Spacing.Some errors withformal style and/or thirdperson were present.1 – 3 errors werepresent.
7 to >0 pts
Developing
Significant errors with thetitle page, 12-point TimesNew Roman fonts,double-spacing; align textleft; extra spacing; or1-inch margins werepresent.Significant errors with oneor more of the followingwere present:• Grammar, and/or;• Punctuation, and/or,• Spelling, and/or;• Spacing.Significant errors withformal style and/or thirdperson were present.More than 3 errors werepresent.
0 pts
Not Present
Errors withspelling,grammar,and/ormechanicswere sopervasive thatthe readabilityand level ofscholarship ofthe paper weresubstantiallyreduced.
10 pts
Case Study Grading Rubric | BUSI643_B01_202320
Criteria Ratings Points
Pagecount
10 to >9 pts
Advanced
At least 3 completepages of originalgraduate-level analysis,evaluation, anddiscussion (plus titlepage, reference page,and tables or figures).
9 to >7 pts
Proficient
At least 2.9 pages oforiginal graduate-levelanalysis, evaluation,and discussion (plustitle page, referencepage, and tables orfigures).
7 to >0 pts
Developing
2.0 – 2.8 pages of originalgraduate-level analysis,evaluation, anddiscussion (plus titlepage, reference page,and tables or figures).
0 pts
Not Present
Less than 2pagessubmitted.
10 pts
Total Points: 100
Case Study Grading Rubric | BUSI643_B01_202320
