Case Study Report

Use a consistent referencing style (IEEE OR Harvard)
Assessment 5 Marking Rubric: Case Study Report — Value 15%
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction Weighting (0 – 49%) (50 – 64%) (65 – 74%) (75 – 84%) (85 – 100%) % Evidence of research Less than 6 relevant titles read. At least 6-8 relevant titles read. At least 8-12 relevant titles read. More than 12 relevant titles read. More than 15 relevant titles read. 15 Relevance of content: Incomplete analysis and no clear identification of relevant ethical issues. Recommendations incomplete or irrelevant. Satisfactory analysis and identification of some relevant ethical ssues. Some sound -ecommendations made. Accurate analysis and identification of most relevant ethical issues. Sound recommendations made. Accurate analysis and identification of all relevant ethical issues. Logical recommendations made. Accurate analysis and identification of all relevant ethical issues. Logical and comprehensive recommendations made. 25 Application of concepts and principles: Analysis and recommendations are not supported. Assumptions made are not noted. Analysis and -ecommendations minimally supported. Assumptions made are not all noted. Analysis and recommendations well supported. All assumptions made are noted. Analysis and recommendations very well supported All assumptions made are noted. Analysis and recommendations are extremely well supported. All assumptions made are noted and explained. 25 Clarity of Structure: The structure of the report is unclear and not logical. It does not address the brief. Use of headings unsatisfactory. The structure of the -eport is logical in parts. It addresses most of the assignment brief. Useassignment of headings satisfactory. Report structure is easy to read and logical, directly addressing briefs. Suitable headings used. Report structure is easy to read and logical, directly addressing assignment briefs. Clear headings used throughout. Report structure is easy to read and compelling, directly addressing assignment briefs. Relevant headings used throughout. 10 Writing A large number of spelling, punctuation or Grammatical errors. Several spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. Some spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. Minor spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. No spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. 10 Correct Referencing: Referencing not done to standard. Overuse of direct quotes. Range of sources used is not relevant and/or not documented. No more than 4 errors. Direct quotes over-used. Sources documented. No more than 2 referencing errors. Direct quotes used sparingly. Sources documented. No referencing errors. Direct quotes used sparingly. Sources documented. No referencing errors. Direct quotes used sparingly and only when needed. Sources documented. 15