MGT5PMT: Assessment 2

MGT5PMT: Assessment 2
Individual Essay (1500 words)
CRITERIA A: Excellent (> 80 %) B: Very good (70 – 79%) C: Good (60 – 69%) D: Acceptable (50 –
59%)
N: Unacceptable
(<50%)
Knowledge and
argumentation
(25% of total mark)
☐ Excellent use of relevant theories,
concepts, terms and definitions and
literature review relating to the topic.
Excellent persuasive argumentation
and discussion by using valid,
relevant and effective examples.
Relevant Evidence of a high level of
independent research (reasoning and
logic in academic research) (20-24
marks )
☐ Very good understanding of
relevant theories and concepts,
terms and definitions in an
academic manner. Very good
persuasive argumentation and
discussion by using valid, relevant
and effective examples. Evidence of
logical arguments in academic
research)
(17.5-20 marks )
☐ Adequate / sufficient
understanding of relevant
theories and concepts, terms and
definitions. Adequate/sufficient
persuasive argumentation and
discussion by using valid,
relevant and effective examples.
Little evidence of independent
research (reasoning and logic in
academic research(15-17.5
marks )
☐ Minimum use of relevant
theories, concepts, terms and
definitions.
Minimum use of persuasive
argumentation and discussion by
using valid, relevant and effective
examples;
Poor evidence of independent
research (reasoning and logic in
academic research)
(12.5-15 marks )
☐ Poor understanding of
relevant theories and
concepts, terms and
definitions. No evidence of
any persuasive
argumentation and
discussion no evidence of
independent research
(reasoning and logic in
academic research).
(<12.5 marks)
Analyses and
Discussions on
Four Benefits
(25% of total mark)
☐ Evidence of a high level of
independent research (using
information beyond that provided in
the subject) to address Question 1
through applying the relevant theories
and concepts. Great attempt to
theoretically justify and address risks
arising from a crisis (e.g. COVID-19
Pandemic) in scheduling, resourcing,
and budgeting a project. (20-24
marks )
☐ Evidence of an independent
research to address Question 1
through applying the relevant
theories and concepts. Very good
attempt to theoretically justify and
address risks arising from a crisis
(e.g. COVID-19 Pandemic) in
scheduling, resourcing, and
budgeting a project . (17.5-20
marks)
☐ Little evidence of independent
research to address Question 1.
Good attempts to link the
relevant theories and concepts.
Good attempt to address risks
arising from a crisis (e.g. COVID-
19 Pandemic) in scheduling,
resourcing, and budgeting a
project . (15-17.5 marks)
☐ Little evidence of independent
research to address Question 1.
Little attempt to address required
points in Question 1. (12.5-15
marks)
☐ No evidence of any
independent research;
Little attempt to link the
relevant theories and
concepts to Question 1. No
evidence of addressing
required points in Question
1. (<12.5 marks)
Recommendations
(15% of total mark)
☐ Excellent proposition of 2
recommendations, addressing
Question 2 and demonstrating a deep
and broad understanding of the
subject matter that can practically
help future projects. (12-15 marks)
☐ Very good proposition of 2
recommendations, addressing
Question 2 and demonstrating an
understanding of the subject matter
that can practically help future
projects. (10.5-11 marks )
☐ Relatively Good proposition of
2 recommendations, addressing
Question 2 that can help future
projects. (9-10 marks )
☐ Good propositions of less than 2
recommendations addressing
Question 2 and demonstrating an
understanding of the subject matter
that can practically help future
projects. (7.5-8 marks )
☐ no or less than three
recommendations that are
not well-articulated in the
essay. (<7.5 marks )
References &
citations
(15% of total mark)
Choosing and using 6 or more peer
reviewed journal articles. Correct
citations within the text based on APA
referencing style.
(12-15 marks)
Choosing and using 6 or more peer
reviewed journal articles. A few
errors in citations within the text
based on APA referencing style.
(10.5-11 marks)
Using 4-5 peer-reviewed journal
articles and/or book chapters and
citations which are written
sufficiently.
(9-10 marks)
Less than 4 peer-reviewed journal
articles and/or book chapters
/citation. Poor techniques of writing
references and citations.
(7.5-8 marks)
Very poor referencing style,
no references and/or no
citations
(<7.5 marks)
Presentation,
structure and
clarity
(20% of total mark)
Excellent clarity in the text,
presentation and structure in outlining
and addressing key issues. Clearly
dividing between introduction, body
paragraphs and conclusion, based on
academic essay structure. Very
strong logical connection between
ideas, sequence and structure. No /a
few grammatical mistakes.
(16-20 marks)
Very well and very clear
presentation and structure.
Addressing some key issues and
demonstrating connection between
ideas, sequence and structure. The
use of different sections
(introduction, body paragraphs and
conclusion), based on academic
essay structure. Existence of
grammatical mistakes across the
submission.
(14-16 marks)
Presentation and structure are
logical and clear. Less attention
to addressing the key issues and
demonstrating connection
between ideas, sequence and
structure. Many grammatical
errors, too many headings out of
an essay structure.
(12-14 marks)
Poor presentation and structure.
No headings or too many
headings, less connection between
ideas, sequence and structure and
too many grammatical errors.
(10-12 marks)
Very poor Presentation and
structure
(<10 marks)

CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS

CLICK THE BUTTON TO MAKE YOUR ORDER

YOU MAY ALSO READ ...  Mini-Case Study: Developing Project Managers at Global Green Books Publishing