Criteria Excellent85.00 to 100.00 %Very Good75.00 to 84.50 %Good65.00 to 74.50 %Satisfactory50.00 to 64.50 %Unsatisfactory0.00 to 49.50 %IntroductionWeight10.00%Topic, key points andpurpose of the presentationis introduced in a clear andengaging way, expertlydefining the context of thepaperTopic, key points andpurpose of the presentationis introduced in a clear andinteresting way whichcaptures the audience’sattentionTopic, key points and purpose of thepresentation is introduced in a clearand interesting wayTopic, key points and purpose ofthe presentation is introduced withclarityIntroduction is underdevelopedin terms of key points and/orpurpose of presentationContentWeight50.00%Very clear key message,supported by a series ofpersuasive key pointsObvious original thoughtused to develop a clear,logical argument, which isstrongly supported byappropriate evidence Thescenario and all questionspresented in assignmentspecification are clearlyaddressed with strongsupporting evidence drawnfrom the scenario and thereference material Extensiveuse of appropriate materialsVery clear key message,supported by a series of verywell presented and arguedkey points Obvious originalthought used to develop aclear, logical argument,which is well supported byappropriate evidence Thescenario and all questionspresented in assignmentspecification are clearlyaddressed with strongsupporting evidence drawnfrom the scenario and thereference material Goodcoverage of appropriatematerialsKey message was clear and mostlysupported by well-argued key pointsSome original thought in combinationwith others’ thoughts is used todevelop a logical argument, supportedby appropriate evidence. The scenarioand questions presented in assignmentspecification are addressed withsupporting evidence drawn from thescenario and the reference materialGood coverage of appropriatematerialsA key message could be inferredas it was generally supported bykey points Clear, logicalargument, supported byappropriate evidence, butlacking in original thought i.e.the argument is built uponothers’ ideas The scenario and /or some questions presented inthe assignment specificationsare clearly addressed withstrong supporting evidencedrawn from the scenario and thereference material Adequatecoverage if appropriatematerialsA key message was not clear asevidence presented did notsupport a message Argumentwhich is not clearly supportedby evidence nor shown originalthought The scenario and / orsome questions presented in theassignment specifications arenot adequately addressed Verylimited coverage of appropriatematerialsConclusionWeight10.00%Clear and concise summarywith effective links to theintroduction and body of thepresentationClear and concise summarywith effective links to theintroduction and body of thepresentationClear and concise summary of thepresentation with links to theintroduction and body of thepresentationThe conclusion provided linksto the introduction and body ofthe presentation, but was notconcise or unclear at timesThe conclusion provided fewlinks to the introduction andbody of the presentation, andwas not concise or clearOrganisationWeight10.00%Material was always orderedin a very logical and clear,easy to follow fashion.Heading & sub-headingsprovide a clear structurewhich is used well to ensuretext is clear. Use of headingsand sub-headings supportsand clarifies the argument.Material was always orderedin a very logical and clear,easy to follow fashion.Headings & sub-headings used will toclarify the text and provide a logicalstructure to the document Materialwas mostly logically ordered, clearand easy to follow.Uses headings & sub-headingsbut the structure thus provided isnot logical. Most of the materialwas ordered in a logical, clearfashion. At times, however, thestructure lead to confusion ofunderstanding.Limited use of headings forsections The material was notordered in a logical, clear andeasy to follow fashion.Frequently the structure ofdocument caused confusion inunderstanding. CitationsWeight10.00%All use of other’s ideas andmaterials acknowledged.Appropriate & consistent intext citation. All in-textreferences section. Allreferences listed in thereferences section cited inthe text. All referencesformatted consistently andappropriatelyAll use of other’s ideas andmaterials acknowledged.Appropriate & consistent intext citation. A smallnumber of errors in citationsor references.Use of other’s ideas and materialsmostly acknowledged. In-textcitation. Citations and referencesgenerally presented accurately butwith some errors.Citations mostly appropriatealthough with some errorsCitations not fully orappropriately providedGrammarand styleWeight10.00%Report has been carefullyproof read, i.e. no grammarand punctuation errors, nospelling errors, notypographical or layouterrors.Report has been carefullyproof read, i.e. no grammarand punctuation errors, nospelling errors, notypographical or layouterrors. Excellent logicalflow with each point leadingto the next; document showsstrong cohesion of thoughtand personation. Readerknows what the point is allthe time, and can clearly seerelevance to other pointsmade elsewhere in thereport.Report has been proof read, i.e. nomore than 3 or 4 grammar andpunctuation errors, spelling errors,typographical or layout errors. Goodlogical flow, with most points leadinginto the next; document generally is acohesive whole. Reader knows whatthe point is most of the time.Report has been spell checkedbut minimal evidence of proofreading i.e. some grammar andpunctuation errors, somespelling errors, sometypographical or layout errors.(Some = 5-6 errors) Limitedconnections between one pointand the next with critical pointspresented ‘out of order’;document still shows clearevidence of different writingstyles. Times where the reader isunsure of the point being made.Some padding / irrelevantmaterial.Obvious that the report has notonly received a cursory proofread and spell check has beenminimalist at best, i.e. manygrammar, punctuation, spellingtypographical and/ or layouterrors (Many = 7 or more).Limited connection betweenone point and the next withcritical points presented ‘out oforder’; document shows clearevidence of having been writtenby multiple people. Frequentlythe reader is left guessing aboutthe point being made which iscaused through irrelevantmaterial.
- Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
- (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
- CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS
