Transcript CON 280: Source Selection and the Administration of

Team-Based Exercise Grading
Rubrics
Unsatisfactory
0-50%
Research
Rubric
(Max = 10
or 15
Points)
Analysis
Rubric
(Max = 10
or 15
Points)
Emerging 51% - 79%
Satisfactory 80% 90%
Failed to locate any
pertinent details.
Located only a few of the
pertinent details
Located most of the
pertinent details.
Failed to utilize
applicable references &
resources.
Utilized only a few of the
applicable references &
resources.
Utilized the applicable
references &
resources.
Failed to show any
understanding of
concepts.
Showed little
Showed adequate
understanding of concepts. understanding of
concepts.
Did not explain concepts
Did not explain
concepts.
clearly.
Did not use concepts
and terms in the right
context.
Did not use any of the
appropriate information,
tools, techniques, or
processes introduced in
class in the analysis.
Did not identify any
alternative.
Explained concepts
Used few of these concepts clearly.
and terms in the right
Used most of the
context.
concepts and terms in
the right context.
Used few of the
appropriate information,
tools, techniques, or
processes introduced in
class in the analysis.
Identified at least one
alternative, but it was not
feasible or affordable.
Used the appropriate
information, tools,
techniques, or
processes introduced
in class in the analysis.
Superior 91% - 100%
Score
Located all pertinent details.
Utilized applicable
references and resources not
introduced in the class
Showed exceptional
understanding of concepts.
Explained concepts very
clearly.
Consistently used the
concepts and terms in the
right context.
Used the appropriate
information, tools,
techniques, or processes
introduced in the class and
others sources in the
analysis.
Identified some
Identified feasible and
feasible and affordable affordable alternatives that
alternatives.
go beyond the obvious or
predictable.
TOTAL SCORE
CON 280, Day 1
Min. = 0 points, Max. = 20 or 30 points
1
Student/Group Presentation Grading Rubric _______________________
(Student/Team)
Presentation
0 points
Organization
(Sequence)
Audience cannot
understand presentation
because there is no
logical sequence of
information.
0.5 point
1 point
2 points
Audience has difficulty
following presentation
because student jumps
around.
Student presents
information in logical
sequence which audience
can follow.
Student presents information
in logical, interesting sequence
which audience can follow.
Student does not have
Subject Knowledge grasp of information;
student cannot answer
(Confidence)
questions about subject.
Student is uncomfortable
with information and is able
to answer only rudimentary
questions.
Student is at ease with
expected answers to all
questions, but fails to
elaborate.
Student demonstrates full
knowledge (more than
required) by answering all class
questions with explanations
and elaboration.
Mechanics
Grammatical, spelling, or
punctuation errors
substantially detract
from the presentation.
Grammatical, spelling, or
punctuation errors interfere
with the presentation.
Grammatical, spelling, or
punctuation errors are rare
and do not detract from the
presentation.
The presentation is free of
grammatical, spelling, and
punctuation errors.
Eye Contact
Student reads all of
report with no eye
contact.
Student occasionally uses
eye contact, but still reads
most of report.
Student maintains eye
Student maintains eye contact
contact most of the time but with audience, seldom
frequently returns to notes. returning to notes.
Elocution
Student mumbles,
incorrectly pronounces
terms, and speaks too
quietly for students in the
back of class to hear.
Student's voice is low.
Student incorrectly
pronounces terms. Audience
members have difficulty
hearing presentation.
Student's voice is clear.
Student pronounces most
words correctly. Most
audience members can hear
presentation.
Total
Student uses a clear voice and
correct, precise pronunciation
of terms so that all audience
members can hear
presentation.
Total for Presentation (Max = 10 points):
CON 280, Day 1
/10
2
ICTA Grading Rubrics: Research
0-2 points
3 points
4 points
5 points
Definition.
(Background and
context.)
No attempt made to
define the topic or the
effort was of such poor
quality that it could not
justify more than minimal
recognition.
An attempt was made at
defining the topic,
however there was
evidence of “copying and
pasting” in the paper.
Background and context is
mostly accurate and
complete – there are
some unclear components
or some minor errors in
the method, results or
implications.
The student thoroughly
defined the topic in
his/her own words,
demonstrating evidence
of accurate research
citing multiple references.
The student provided an
informative background
on the topic.
Construct.
(Elements or subtopics associated
with this subject)
No attempt made to
explain the components of
the topic or the attempt
was of such poor quality
that it could not warrant
more than minimal
recognition.
The paper listed the
elements or components
of the topic, but cited only
a single reference.
The paper cited two or
more sources as
references or background
on the topic.
The student detailed the
components of the topic
and their importance
(with references).
References.
Case studies cited
(e.g. Court rulings,
GAO, ASBCA, etc.)
Primary source
documents (FAR,
DFARS, PGI, etc.)
The paper did not cite a
case study and/or
reference, or the attempt
was of such poor quality
that it could not justify
more than minimal
recognition. Components
are missing, inaccurate, or
unclear.
Cited only a single
reference to support the
topic. Reference selected
is not always relevant to
the argument or is
somewhat vague and
incomplete.
References cited are
relevant to the argument
and are mostly accurate
and complete. There are
some unclear components
or some minor errors in
the method, results, or
implications.
References cited are
highly relevant to the
argument, and are
presented accurately and
completely. The method,
results, and implications
are all presented
accurately.
Score
Total for Research (Max = 15 Points):
CON 280, Day 1
/15
3
ICTA Grading Rubrics: Analysis
0-3 points
Analysis Rubric
(Use applicable
definition)
4-7 points
8-9 points
10 points
Failed to show any
understanding of concepts.
Showed little understanding Showed adequate to good
of concepts.
understanding of concepts.
Showed exceptional
understanding of concepts.
Did not explain concepts.
Did not explain concepts
clearly.
Explained concepts very
clearly.
Did not use concepts and
terms in the right context.
Did not use any of the
appropriate information,
tools, techniques, or
processes.
Did not identify any
alternative.
Used few of these concepts
and terms in the right
context.
Explained concepts clearly.
Used most of the concepts
and terms in the right
context.
Used the appropriate
Used few of the appropriate information, tools,
information, tools,
techniques, or processes.
techniques, or processes.
Identified some feasible and
Identified at least one
affordable alternatives.
alternative, but it was not
feasible or affordable.
Score
Consistently used the
concepts and terms in the
right context.
Used the appropriate
information, tools,
techniques, or processes.
Identified feasible and
affordable alternatives that
go beyond the obvious or
predictable.
Total for Analysis (Max = 10 Points):
CON 280, Day 1
/10
4
ICTA Grading Rubrics: Documentation
Paper
0-2 points
3 points
4 points
5 points
Professionalism
Many errors in citations and
paper format noted. The
paper failed to demonstrate
cohesive thought process or
logic. The paper is not
indicative of a product
created by a contracting
professional.
Some errors in citations and
paper format noted. The
paper demonstrated
relatively cohesive thought
process or logic. The paper
is not always indicative of a
product created by a
contracting professional.
Few errors in citations and
paper format noted. The
paper is generally indicative
of a product created by a
contracting professional.
Very few to no errors in
citations and paper format.
The paper demonstrated a
high degree of logic and
cohesive thought regarding
its research, and structure is
indicative of a contracting
professional.
Grammar &
Mechanics
Grammatical, spelling, or
punctuation errors
substantially detract from
the paper.
Grammatical, spelling, or
punctuation errors
interfere with reading the
paper.
Grammatical, spelling, or
punctuation errors are rare
and do not detract from the
paper.
The paper is free of
grammatical, spelling, and
punctuation errors.
Total for Documentation (Max = 10 points):
CON 280, Day 1
Score
/10
5
Participation Grading Rubrics
Overall Class Participation
Well Below
Expectations
(0-0.5)
Slightly Below Expectations
(0.75)
Meets or Exceeds Expectations
(1)
Attendance /
Promptness
Student is often late to class and/or
has poor class attendance
Student is occasionally late to
Student is always prompt and
class and regularly attends class regularly attends class
Level of
Engagement in
Class
Student rarely or never contributes to
class by offering ideas and asking
questions and/or is engaged in
activities not directly related to the
class (e.g., instant messaging, texting,
online browsing, reading email, etc.)
Behavior
Student often displays disruptive
behavior during class (e.g. instant
messaging, texting, reading email,
talking out of turn, etc.)
Preparedness
Student is rarely prepared for class
with assignments and required class
materials
Student contributes to class by
offering ideas and asking
questions once per class and is
not engaged in activities not
directly related to the class
(e.g., instant messaging,
texting, online browsing,
reading email, etc.)
Student rarely displays
disruptive behavior during class
(e.g., instant messaging,
texting, reading email, talking
out of turn, etc.)
Student is usually prepared for
class with assignments and
required class materials
Listening
Student does not listen when others
Student listens when others talk Student listens when others talk in
talk in class and often interrupts when in class
class. Student incorporates or builds
others speak.
off of the ideas of others.
SCORE
Student proactively contributes to
class by offering ideas and asking
questions more than once per class
session and is not engaged in activities
not directly related to the class (e.g.,
instant messaging, texting, online
browsing, reading email, etc.)
Student never displays disruptive
behavior during class (e.g., instant
messaging, texting, reading email,
talking out of turn, etc.)
Student is always prepared for class
with assignments and required class
materials
TOTAL SCORE
CON 280, Day 1
Max. = 5 points
Min. = 0 points
6
Participation Grading Rubrics
(cont’d)
Group Participation
Well Below
Expectations
(0-0.5)
Level of
Engagement
As an IPT member, student was
rarely an active participant and
disengaged often. Nonparticipation, absence from
exercises or unwillingness to
reach a consensus was often
observed.
Feedback
It was observed that the student
did not offer constructive or
useful feedback
Listening &
It was observed that the student
Cooperation
sometimes treated group
members disrespectfully, shared
the workload unfairly or did not
listen to others and often
interrupted them
Use of Resources Students’ use of resources
& Tools
and/or tools was rarely observed
Presentation /
Debrief
Student did not debrief group
work.
Slightly Below Expectations
(0.75)
Meets or Exceeds Expectations
(1)
As an IPT member, student was
an active participant but at times
appeared to be disengaged.
Non-participation, absence from
exercises or unwillingness to
reach a consensus was
infrequently observed.
It was observed that the student
offered constructive feedback
when appropriate
It was observed that the student
treated group members
respectfully, shared the
workload fairly and usually
listened to others’ ideas
As an IPT member, student was an
active participant. Non-participation,
absence from exercises or
unwillingness to reach a consensus
was not observed.
Students’ use of resources
and/or tools was occasionally
observed
Student debriefed group work
one time.
Students’ use of resources and/or
tools was often observed
SCORE
It was observed that the student
offered detailed, constructive
feedback when appropriate
It was observed that the student
treated group members respectfully,
shared the workload fairly and
listened carefully to others’ ideas
Student debriefed group work more
than one time.
TOTAL SCORE
CON 280, Day 1
Max. = 5 points
Min. = 0 points
7