MIS534 – Information Security Management Topic Paper Grading Rubric

mis534 – information security management topic paper grading rubric topic title:____________________________________ group members:

MIS534 – Information Security Management
Topic Paper Grading Rubric
Topic Title:____________________________________
Group Members:
_________________________________________________________________
Criterion
=========
Standard
========
Responsiveness to Topic
Score / 20
==========
20 – clearly addresses the topic and responds effectively to all
aspects of the assignment;
18 – clearly address the topic, but may respond to some aspects of the
assignment more effectively than others
16 – addresses the topic, but may slight some aspects of the topic
14 – indicates confusion about the topic or neglects important aspects
of the assignment
12 – suggests an inability to comprehend the assignment or to respond
meaningfully to the topic
Communication of Ideas
----------------------
Score / 20
20 – explores the issues showing thorough comprehension of the text;
goes beyond the obvious or class discussion
18 – shows some depth and complexity of thought
16 – may treat the topic simplistically or repetitively; doesn’t
demonstrate sufficient comprehension of the text
14 – lacks focus, demonstrates confused or simplistic thinking, or
fails to communicate ideas
12 – is unfocused, illogical, incoherent or disorganized
Organization
------------
Score / 20
20 – is coherently organized (i.e. stays on target with the topic),
with ideas supported by apt reasons
18 – is well organized and developed with appropriate reasons and
examples
16 – is adequately organized and developed, generally supporting ideas
with reasons and examples
14 – is poorly organized and/or undeveloped; lacks support from the
text
12 – is undeveloped; provides little or no relevant support
Control of Mechanics, Sentence Structure, Grammar, Spelling
-----------------------------------------------------------
Score / 10
10 – is generally free from errors in mechanics, usage, and sentence
structure
8 – may have a few errors in mechanics, usage, and sentence structure
6 – may have some errors, but generally demonstrates control of
mechanics, usage, and sentence structure
4 – is marred by an accumulation of errors in mechanics, usage, and
sentence structure
0 – has serious and persistent errors in word choice, mechanics,
usage, and sentence structure
Paper Length and References
Score /10
10 – Paper meets length requirements (1000 – 1500) and includes at
least 8 references
5 – Paper only meets either the length or number of references
0 – Paper does not meet length and less than 8 references
Paper Presentation
Score /20
See Criteria on Next Page
PRESENTATION GUIDELINES
Exemplary (5)
Satisfactory (3)
Unacceptable (0)
Score
Technical Knowledge
The presenter shows a deep knowledge of the subject material. They are
able to answer all questions on the material and expand/explicate on
details both in the presentation and outside of the material in the
presentation.
The presenter knew the material well. They were able to answer most
questions well, and showed a generally good knowledge of the topic
being presented.
The presenter did not know the material being presented. They were
unable to answer questions from the audience and seemed unclear of the
technical content of their own materials.
Presentation Materials
The materials are clear and well designed. They present the
information in a coherent and well thought out way.
The materials were generally clear and reasonably well designed. They
presented the information fairly well, but could have been better at
points.
The materials were hard to read and poorly organized. They distracted
from the presentation, rather than adding to it.
Presentation Style
The presentation moved well. Transitions between topics were smooth
and well thought out.
The presentation moved well, but some transitions were rough. The
presenter had to refer to their notes occasionally to find their place
in the presentation.
The presentation was choppy and inconsistent. The presenter constantly
read from their notes and easily lost their place in the presentation.
Presenter Presence
The presenter made excellent eye contact and "owned" the audience.
They commanded the attention of the audience at all times and were
dynamic and engaging.
The presenter made eye contact with the audience and could be heard.
They occasionally read from their materials or notes, rather than from
memory. They made a few distracting body movements.
The presenter did not look at the audience and was difficult to hear.
They made multiple distracting movements, or hid behind a podium. They
did nothing to engage the audience in the presentation.
Total