MMH230 T3 2019 Marking Rubric Analytical Essay pdf.pdf - T3 2019 MMH230 Assessment Task 1 Marking Rubric Performance Indicators YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM

T 3 2019 MMH230 Assessment Task 1 Marking Rubric Performance Indicators Performance Levels YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD MEETS STANDARD EXCEEDS STANDARD Fail (N) /0-49% Poor Pass (P)/ 50-59% Acceptable Credit (C)/60-69% Good Distinction (D)/ 70-79% Very good High Distinction (HD)/80-100 Excellent Identification & explanation of the issue ULO 1 (GLO 1) ULO 3 (GLO 3) Demonstrates no understanding of the issue or related contextual factors. No attempt is made to identify, explain or apply HRM concepts or theories. Demonstrates a very limited, incomplete or incorrect understanding of the issue or related contextual factors. Demonstrates limited or incomplete knowledge of HRM concepts or theories. Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of the issue with evidence of some relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a developing knowledge of HRM concepts and theories. Provides a basic description that is mostly correct. Generally demonstrates a good level of understanding of the issue with evidence of most relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a good knowledge of HRM concepts and theories. Provides a clear, accurate description. Consistently demonstrates a very good understanding of the issue with evidence of almost all relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a very good knowledge of HRM concepts and theories. Provides a detailed, well- integrated and accurate description. Consistently demonstrates an expert understanding of the issue and its complexities with evidence of all relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a sophisticated knowledge of HRM concepts and theories. Provides a comprehensive well-integrated, accurate and critical discussion. (/8 marks) (0 - 2.3) (2.4 - 3.9) (4 - 4.7) (4.8 - 5.5) (5.6 - 6.3) (6.4 - 8) Critical analysis of HRM implications of the issue ULO 1 (GLO 1) ULO 3 (GLO 4) No attempt is made to identify, describe or analyse the HRM implications of the issue. Demonstrates no understanding of HRM knowledge relevant to the issue. Always confuses theory and facts with personal opinion. Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, with no questioning. Provides a limited, incomplete or incorrect account of the HRM implications of the issue that is inconsistent with existing HRM theory and research. Demonstrates a poor understanding of the HRM knowledge relevant to the issue. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/ evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Often confuses theory and facts with personal opinion. Provides a satisfactory account of the HRM implications of the issue that is mostly correct, yet some inconsistencies with existing HRM theory and research remain. Demonstrates a satisfactory level of understanding of the HRM knowledge relevant to the issue.