iRubric: Org Assessment rubric

(draft) edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

Org Assessment

This rubric is for grading student's written assignments in GE3010 Organizations as Systems & Structures (Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA). Alan E. Nelson, Lecturer of Management

Rubric Code: CA3772

By aenelson

Draft

Public Rubric

Subject: Business

Type: Project

Grade Levels: Graduate

Criterion
	Strong Growth Opportunities (N/A)	Room for Improvement (N/A)	Strong (N/A)	Very Strong (N/A)	Comments (N/A)
Org Basics 10 % Introduction and overview of the org; stats; name; type of org; employees/staff; demographics, etc.	Strong Growth Opportunities Little to nothing a stranger could understand; assumes the reader knows the orgs you're discussing	Room for Improvement Haphazard and/or disjointed facts; reader doesn't get a sense of what the orgs do or how they are structured	Strong Overall good sense of what the orgs do, how they function, and sufficient stats to understand what it is the orgs do and to what extent	Very Strong Same qualities as "Strong" criteria; addition of appropriate visuals and graphics	Comments
Analysis 45 % Investigate the organization’s culture and climate, motivational system, leadership approaches and effects, decision making practices, power and social influence patterns, and environment/stakeholder management	Strong Growth Opportunities Disjointed; lack of depth and/or continuity in terms of both macro and micro issues; no connection between the analysis and what we discussed in class/readings	Room for Improvement Provides a sense of what goes on, but a bit disjointed and with holes; very light attempt to connect other class readings/talks with analysis	Strong Overall strong and succinct presentation of a variety of org issues, including those listed in assignment; ties class discussion and readings without making recommendations for change	Very Strong Meets qualities described in "Strong" criteria, but includes appropriate graphic inclusions, bullet points, and presented in a pithy yet high impact manner	Comments
SWOT Analysis 25 % Provide a brief SWOT analysis on perceived strengths, weaknesses (internal), opportunities and threats (external)	Strong Growth Opportunities Very light attempt at the four components or missing one or more items; seemed to confuse internal issues with external ones; perceived lack of an internal expert	Room for Improvement Good overall inclusion of 4 elements; some lack and clarity on what they mean; some confusion on internal/external components	Strong Strong presentation of all four factors with an apparent insider's perspective; presented succinctly/ visually appealing.	Very Strong The same qualities of the "Strong" criteria; addition of commentary presented as thoughtful possibilities vs. over-confidence	Comments
Grammar, Punctuation & Spelling 10 % The ability to analyze org culture and then convey it effectively in writing	Strong Growth Opportunities Writing style is high school caliber; sentence and paragraph structures contain errors and do not reflect grad level professionalism	Room for Improvement Writing style is undergrad caliber, with generally good writing but some errors; a bit muddy and fails to reflect high impact/bottom line writing	Strong Quality grad level writing; few errors; good sentence and paragraph structure; clear flow and easy to read; well organized cognitively and visually.	Very Strong Same qualities as "Strong" criteria; active verb use, crisp and compelling word choice, and professional (bottom line/high impact); publishable	Comments
Presentation 10 % The min-presentation was clear, well organized and succinct	Strong Growth Opportunities Class presentation seems disjointed; team members stepped on each other; not a strong sense of preparation	Room for Improvement Good verbal presentation; no visuals; some lack of clarity in the minds of the listeners; ran overtime; uneven sharing	Strong Clear and succinct; provided appropriate visuals; audience "got it;" stayed within time parameters	Very Strong Qualities of "Strong" criteria without overstating the solutions; presenters seemed like experts on the org	Comments

Keywords:

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric