BSB Minor Project Grading Rubric w/Biblical Integration (100 points)
|
Excellent (20 – 18 pts)
|
Good (17 – 16 pts)
|
Fair (15 – 14 pts)
|
Poor (0-13 pts)
|
Possible Pts.
|
Actual Pts.
|
Content Knowledge
|
0
|
0
|
- Demonstrates exceptional knowledge, insight and understanding of the subject matter, including the ability to select and apply the most appropriate, well-researched content to develop an effective approach.
- Demonstrates good knowledge, insight, and understanding of the content, including the ability to select and apply an appropriate, well-researched content to develop an effective approach.
- Demonstrates basic knowledge, insight, and understanding of the content; content is not consistently appropriate or well-researched.
- Demonstrates limited understanding of assignment issues; content is not appropriate or well-researched.
- Demonstrates content mastery by applying the most suitable theoretical framework, models, and/or techniques.
- Applies a suitable theoretical framework, models, and/or techniques.
- Application of content is adequate, but limited.
- Little or no application of content; with limited and mostly inappropriate use of theoretical frameworks, models, and/or techniques.
- Includes the application of relevant concepts from previous courses, when appropriate.
- Draws from and generally applies content from previous courses, when appropriate.
- Limited use of content from other courses.
- Connections to concepts from previous courses are absent.
- Examples link directly and appropriately to the subject matter.
- Provides some relevant examples.
- Limited examples are provided and not consistently appropriate.
- Examples are absent and/or not related to the subject matter.
- Uses course materials as a springboard for developing original, insightful ideas.
- Content is used to generate some original ideas.
- Minimal number of original ideas.
- No original ideas developed from the content are apparent.
|
|
|
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
20
|
20
|
Communication and Research
|
|
0
|
- There is an exceptionally clear, arguable, well-developed, and definitive position stated.
- Information is presented in a logical, interesting sequence organized with smooth transitions and appropriate headings.
- Uses an appropriate level of highest quality research, and theories and concepts are presented accurately and sufficiently.
- All supportive materials are properly and flawlessly cited, and formatting is consistent with the APA style.
- Project is exceptionally concise, clear, with consistently proper grammar, spelling, and paragraphing.
- Clearly addresses the target audience.
- The project strictly adheres to the guidelines and format required by the assignment.
- The conclusion unites the important points of the presentation and encourages future discussion.
|
- There is an arguable, well-developed, and definitive position stated.
- Information is presented in a logical sequence organized with generally smooth transitions and appropriate headings.
- Uses an appropriate level of research, and theories and concepts are generally presented accurately and sufficiently.
- Supportive materials are properly cited with minimal (2-3) errors, and formatting is consistent with the APA style.
- Project is concise, clear, with proper grammar, spelling, and paragraphing with minimal (2-3) errors.
- Demonstrates an awareness of the target audience.
- The project generally adheres to the format required by the assignment.
- The project does not fully adhere to the format required by the assignment.
- The project does not adhere to the format required by the assignment
- The conclusion unites the important points of the presentation.
- The conclusion summarizes the important points.
- The conclusion is vague and incomplete.
|
- A position is stated and adequately developed.
- Presentation of information is not consistently logical and transitions between points are not smooth and inconsistent headings.
- Uses an adequate level of research, but theories and concepts are not consistently presented accurately and sufficiently.
- Supportive materials are presented, but with errors (4+), and formatting is not consistent with the APA style.
- Project contains errors (4-6) in grammar, spelling, and paragraphing.
- Demonstrates little understanding of the target audience.
|
- The position is vague and not well-developed.
- Lacks clear and logical development of ideas with weak transitions between ideas and paragraphs, with no headings to separate and transition ideas.
- Research is superficial and insufficient to support the topic.
- Supportive materials lack proper formatting with limited details and many sources missing or incomplete.
- Numerous (7+) and obvious grammatical, spelling, and stylistic errors undermine reader comprehension.
- Does not acknowledge or identify the target audience.
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional considerations for PowerPoint/visual presentations:
- The presentation layout is interesting and visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message.
- Professional-level use of headings, sub-headings and white space, along with appropriate fonts and size.
- All graphics are attractive (size and color) and help to explain, reinforce, and support the theme/content of the presentation.
|
Additional considerations for PowerPoint/visual presentations:
- The presentation layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message.
- Appropriate use of headings, sub-headings and white space, along with appropriate fonts and size.
- Most of the graphics are attractive (size and color) and support the theme/ content of the presentation.
|
Additional considerations for PowerPoint/visual presentations:
- The presentation layout is visually inconsistent and sporadically contributes to the overall message.
- Headings, sub-headings, and white space do not consistently support message.
- Fonts and text size are inconsistent and distracting.
- Graphics are occasionally used, but rarely support the presentation.
|
Additional considerations for PowerPoint/visual presentations:
- The presentation layout is haphazard and visually contributes little to the overall message.
- Headings and subheading are missing or irrelevant to the supporting text.
- Font and size are inappropriate resulting in text that is difficult to read.
- Graphics are superfluous or absent.
|
Comments:
|
20
|
20
|
Critical Thinking
|
|
0
|
- Demonstrates exceptional work through the consistent use of a clear and logical progression of points and conclusions.
- Demonstrates proficiency through the use of a clear and logical progression of points and conclusions.
- Inconsistent application of logic in presenting a progression of points and conclusions.
- Logical reasoning and progression of points are virtually absent.
- Carefully analyzes the information collected and draws appropriate, inventive, warranted, judicious, and non-fallacious conclusions supported by evidence through accurate interpretation of statements, graphics (e.g., charts, tables), etc.
- Analyzes the information collected and draws appropriate, warranted, and non-fallacious conclusions; conclusions are generally supported through interpretation of statements, graphics (e.g., charts, tables), etc.
- Analyzes the Information collected, but conclusions do not consistently and logically derive from that information; Interpretation of statements, graphics (e.g., charts, tables), etc. is occasionally invalid.
- Fails to identify conclusions, implications, and consequences of the issue. Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc. and draws unsupported and fallacious conclusions; arguments are not persuasive.
- Identifies not only the basics issues and implications surrounding the topic, but recognizes subtle nuances.
- Identifies all the basic issues and implications surrounding the topic.
- Identifies some of the basic issues and implications surrounding the topic.
- Identifies few if any of the basic issues and implications surrounding the topic.
- Identifies and questions the validity of key assumptions.
- Identifies and questions the validity of assumptions.
- Some underlying assumptions are identified, but are not adequately explored.
- Does not surface and interact with underlying assumptions.
- Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view, addresses contradictory evidence, and constructs persuasive and compelling arguments.
- Offers analysis and evaluations of obvious alternative points of view; fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
- Offers limited analysis and evaluations of some alternative points of view, but quickly dismisses these points.
- Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counter-arguments.
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Makes clear connections to previous or current content and to real-life situations.
- Makes connections to previous or current content and to real-life situations.
- Makes occasional connections to previous or current content or to real-life situations.
- Makes no connections to previous or current content or to real-life situations.
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
20
|
20
|
Business Application
|
|
0
|
- The project proposes feasible, practical, interesting, and actionable recommendations and solutions that consider cost, culture, timeframe, and other critical factors.
- The project proposes feasible, practical, and actionable recommendations and solutions that consider most critical factors, such as cost, culture, and timeframe.
- Proposes recommendations that are not consistently feasible, practical, and actionable; limited consideration of critical business factors.
- Recommendations are impractical, uninspiring, and not feasible. Solutions do not take into account environmental or organizational factors.
- Clearly identifies and describes action issues associated with specific decision-makers.
- Action items for specific decision-makers are identified.
- Action items are presented, but are not linked to specific decision-makers.
- Specific action items are not delineated for particular decision-makers.
- Presents information, concepts, conclusions, etc., so that others can use the information to improve/transform their lives and the organization they serve.
- Presents information, concepts, conclusions, etc., so that others can use the information to improve/ transform their lives and the organization they serve.
- Information, concepts, conclusions, etc. as presented have a limited, transformative impact on individuals or the organization.
- Information, concepts, conclusions, etc. are not presented in ways that will transform and serve organizations and people.
- A plan for measuring outcomes for the proposal is detailed, well-thought out, and realistic.
- A plan for measuring outcomes is presented.
- General consideration for measuring outcomes is apparent, but no specific plan or approach is presented.
- Little or no consideration is given to measuring or quantifying outcomes or assessing the value added to the organization.
- Clearly describes the value added to the organization and how goals balance and satisfy different stakeholders’ interests.
- Attention is given to the value added to the organization and the impact on key stakeholders.
- The value added to the organization and the impact on stakeholders is mentioned, but not adequately explained and developed.
- The impact on various stakeholders is not discussed.
- Selects and applies the appropriate analytical tools (quantitative and qualitative) to address the business issues for the particular discipline (e.g., accounting, economics).
- Selects and applies the appropriate analytical tools (quantitative and qualitative) to address the business issues for the particular discipline (e.g., accounting, economics).
- Utilizes some, but does not consistently select/apply the appropriate analytical tools (quantitative and qualitative) to address the business issues for the particular discipline.
- Does not effectively select and apply the appropriate analytical tools of the appropriate discipline (e.g., accounting, economics).
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
20
|
20
|
Biblical Integration
|
|
0
|
- Demonstrates clear knowledge of the basic themes and truths of the Old and New Testaments and the basic beliefs of Christianity.
- Demonstrates knowledge of the basic themes and truths of the Old and New Testaments and the basic beliefs of Christianity.
- Demonstrates limited knowledge of some of the fundamental themes and truths of Scripture and the basic beliefs of Christianity.
- Demonstrates little or no knowledge of the basic themes and truths of Scripture and Christianity.
- Clear application of Bible-based morality and social responsibility.
- Some application of Bible-based morality and/or social responsibility is evident.
- Application of Bible-based morality and/or social responsibility is minimal.
- Application of Bible-based morality and/or social responsibility is absent.
- Clear statement and application of a Christian worldview
- A Christian worldview is stated and generally applied.
- Some aspects of a Christian worldview are stated, but inadequately and/or erroneously applied.
- Application of Christian worldview is absent.
- Demonstrates the ability to think critically and to integrate and apply knowledge through the lens of Scripture. Relies on a number of commentaries and basic exegesis to support position.
- Relies on a commentary and basic exegesis to support position.
- Only biblical “proof-texting” is utilized to support position.
- The Bible or is rarely used to support a position.
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments:
|
20
|
20
|
Late deductions (e.g., -10):
|
|
0
|
Score:
|
100
|
100
|
Overall Comments:
|
|
|