24  Rubrics

24.1 Group Presentation (20%)

Criteria	High Performance (16 - 20)	Good Performance (13.5 - 15.5)	Satisfactory (10 - 13)	Unsatisfactory (0 - 10)
Answers to the questions
Succinct introduction of the case study setting.	The group provides a short but complete introduction of the case firm with only the elements relevant to the answers.	The group provides an introduction of the case firm with mostly relevant elements to their answers.	The group provides an introduction of the case firm but sticks to the case study text and does not adapt it to the questions.	The group provides no or an incomplete introduction for the case study.
Answers to the case study question.	The group answers the questions correctly for closed type questions and gives additional examples, insights and interpretation. They answer open ended questions creatively.	The group answers most questions correctly with some additional examples, insights or interpretation and answers the open ended questions as expected.	The group answers most questions correctly but sticks merely to the answers. The group answers the open ended questions as expected.	The group does not answer most questions correctly or the answers are incomplete.
Relevance of the answers.	The group focuses on the questions at hand and does not introduce irrelevant tangents.	The group rarely strays away from the questions.	The group sometimes strays away from the questions.	The group goes on tangents that are not relevant to the questions.
Overall conclusion after answering all the questions.	The group ties the different answers together and tries to interpret them in light of the theory in the lectures.	The group gives a complete summary of the answers.	The group gives a decent summary of the answers.	The group gives a limited or no summary of the answers.
Presentation and delivery
Use of visual aids	The slides or other visual aids are consistent in style across presenters, support the talk (through graphs, pictures, and tables) without containing the whole talk.	The visual aids or consistent in style. The aids are sometimes supportive of the talk, sometimes a mere summary of the talk. The visual aids contain some small typos or they are sometimes difficult to read.	The visual aids present an adequate summary of the talk. There is a lot of information on the slides which is read out loud. The slides look sloppy and unprepared in some sections of the presentation.	The slides are incomplete, mostly sloppy and unprepared.
Presentation style	The presenters have good posture and make eye contact with the audience.	The presenters make eye contact with the audience most of the time.	The presenters try to make eye contact with the audience.	The presenters have no eye contact with the audience and do not try. They merely look at their written preparation or the slides.
Speaking skills	The presenters speak clearly with good pace and volume. They use normal speaking/conversational language, different from writing language. The presenters speak mostly clearly with adequate pacing and volume.	The presenters use normal conversational language. Sometimes they rely too much on jargon and abbreviations without explaining them.	The presenters are sometimes difficult to understand but pacing and volume are adequate. Overall, they rely too much on jargon and abbreviations without explaining them.	The presenters are hard to understand, talk too fast and/or to silent.
Structure of a single talk	The presenters tell a story where they explain, not just tell, their answer. They use examples from the case study.	The presenters try to explain their answer in a coherent story.	The presenters are enumerating the answers as different points. There is no link between the different parts of an answer.	The answers are incoherent and the reasoning is very difficult to follow.

24.2 Group Evaluation (10%)

Criteria	High Performance (8.5 - 10)	Good Performance (8 - 6.5)	Satisfactory (5 - 6)	Unsatisfactory (0 - 4.5)
Answers to questions
Quality of evaluation	The group focuses on improvements and additions to the answers in the main presentation.	The group mainly focuses on improvements and additions but sometimes strays into merely presenting its own solution.	The group skips between discussing the main presentation and presenting its own similar solution.	The group does not discuss the main presentation.
Issues discussed.	The group focuses on the main issues with the main presentation and only adds critique on the details when time allows for it. The group discusses all questions.	The group focuses on the main issues with some detail critique. The group tries to discuss all questions but it is biased toward some parts.	The group mixes main issues with detail critique on presentation and slides. The group only focuses on a limited subset of the main presentation.	The group has no significant contribution to the main issues in the answers.
Communication and delivery
Communication skills	The group politely explains how and why their ideas and solutions are different from the main presentation. The group is not afraid to point out when they believe the main presentation is wrong or incomplete.	The group politely explains their ideas and solutions. The group hesitantly points out mistakes when they believe the main presentation is wrong or incomplete.	The group merely explains their own ideas and solutions. The group rarely points out mistakes when they believe the main presentation is wrong or incomplete.	The group attacks the main group. OR The group is to polite and does not point out major mistakes.
Specificity	The group refers back to the visual aids and/or talk of the main group to identify their own discussion points.	The group sometimes refers back to the visual aids and/or talk of the main group to identify their own discussion points.	The group rarely refers back to the visual aids and/or talk of the main group to identify their own discussion points.	The group does not refer back to the visual aids and/or talk of the main group to identify their own discussion points.
Clarification	When the tutor or another student does not understand, the group adequately reframes or clarifies their discussion point or their improvement to the answer.	When the tutor or another student does not understand a discussion point, the group adequately reframes or clarifies their discussion point or their improvement to the answer.	When the tutor or another student does not understand understand a discussion point, the group tries to clarify their discussion point or their improvement to the answer.	When the tutor or another student does not understand understand a discussion point, the group does not clarify their discussion point or their improvement to the answer.

24.3 Group Report (20%)

Criteria	High Performance (12.5 - 15)	Good Performance (10 - 12)	Satisfactory (7.5 - 9.5)	Unsatisfactory (0 - 7)
Answers to the questions
Succinct introduction of the case study setting.	The group provides a short but complete introduction of the case firm with only the elements relevant to the answers.	The group provides a sufficient introduction of the case firm with mostly relevant elements to their answers.	The group provides an introduction of the case firm but sticks to the case study text and does not adapt it to the questions.	The group provides no or an incomplete introduction for the case study.
Answers to the case study question.	The group answers the questions correctly for closed type questions and gives additional insight and interpretation. They answer open ended questions creatively.	The group answers most questions correctly with some additional insights or interpretation and answers the open ended questions as expected.	The group answers most questions correctly but sticks merely to the answers. The group answers the open ended questions as expected.	The group does not answer most questions correctly or the answers are incomplete.
Relevance	The group focuses on the questions at hand and does not introduce irrelevant tangents.	The group strays away from the question once or twice.	The group sometimes strays away from the questions.	The group goes on tangents that are not relevant to the questions.
Conclusion	The group ties the different answers together and tries to interpret them in light of the theory in the lectures.	The group gives a complete summary of the answers.	The group gives a decent summary of the answers.	The group gives a limited or no summary of the answers.
Presentation, Writing, and Organisation
Use of tables and/or figures	The report contains one or two graphs, figures or tables that illustrate and summarise the answer. The graphs, figures and tables are appropriately annotated.	The report contains one or two graphs, figures or tables that illustrate and summarise the answer.	The report contains one graph, figure or table.	The report contains no graph, figure or table even though it might illustrate some of the answers.
Writing style.	The report is written in full sentences that are connected to each other. There are no straight enumerations in the report.	The report is mostly written in full sentences that are connected to each other. There is maximum one straight enumeration in the report.	The report is mostly written in full sentences. The connection between sentences is sometimes lost. There are some enumerations in the report.	The report contains incomplete sentences and a number of spelling errors. The connection between sentences is sometimes lost. There are a lot of enumerations in the report.
Specificity	The language is concrete without any vague words. The actors, people or groups in the business case are clearly identified when their actions or preferences are described. The report uses specific examples of the business case.	The language is mostly concrete without any vague words. The actors, people or groups in the business case are almost always identified when their actions or preferences are described. The report tries to use specific examples of the business case.	The language is not always concrete and sometimes ambiguous. The actors, people or groups in the business case are not always clearly identified. The report rarely refers back to situations and remarks in the business case.	The language is very vague. The actors, people or groups in the business case are conflated or not identified. The report is written on a very abstract, theoretical level. The report does not refer to the business case.