2024 Rubric Take Assignment.docx JJJJJJJ

How to assess using rubric

1. Name & surname:
Student number:
Criteria 5 4 3 2 1 Marks
General
Argument
(Intro, Body,
Conclusion)
Clear, logical, and
engaging order of
events with a strong
introduction,
detailed body, and
compelling
conclusion.
Clear order of
events with an
introduction,
detailed body, and
conclusion.
The sequence of
events, arguments,
or content has
issues.
The sequence of
events, arguments,
or content is
questionable.
Seriously lacking in
order.
5
Understandin
g of
philosophical
perspective(s)
Demonstrates a
comprehensive
understanding of
philosophical
perspective(s)
Shows a solid
understanding of
philosophical
perspective(s)
Adequate
understanding of
philosophical
perspective(s)
Shows a basic
understanding of
the philosophical
perspective(s)
Shows a limited
understanding of
the philosophical
perspective(s)
5
Application of
the
philosophical
perspective(s)
to the
education(al)
world
Exceptional and
effective application
of the philosophical
insights to the
creative output.
Effectively applies
philosophical
concepts to the
creative output.
Some application of
the philosophical
concepts to the
creative output.
Limited application
of philosophical
concepts to the
creative output.
Fails to apply
philosophical
concepts to the
creative output.
5
Critical
overview
Implications,
strengths, and
weaknesses of the
philosophical
perspective(s)
relevant critical
overview discussed
Implications,
strengths, and
weaknesses of the
philosophical
perspective(s) or
another
pedagogically
Implications,
strengths, and
weaknesses of
philosophical
perspective(s) or
another
pedagogically
Understanding of
the critical
implications of
philosophical
perspective(s)is
questionable.
Seriously lacking.5

2. in detail. relevant critical
overview of the
relevant theoretical
framework
discussed.
relevant critical
overview of the
relevant theoretical
framework lacking.
Practical
examples and
suggestions
Relevant, thought-
provoking, and
informative
application of
contextual
examples.
Relevant and
informative
application of
contextual
examples.
Somewhat relevant
application of
contextual
examples.
Application and
understanding are
questionable.
Seriously lacking.5
Creativity Unique and
engaging product
that required
significant creative
effort.
Unique and
engaging product
that required some
creative effort.
Some creative effort
was applied in
planning, designing,
and developing the
product.
Lacking in creative
effort.
Seriously lacking in
creative effort.
5
Quality of
one-page
written
explanation
Clear, concise, and
thoroughly justifies
the use of
philosophical
perspective(s).
Excellent coherence
and flow.
Exceptional
reasoning,
convincing,
insightful
arguments that are
reflective of deep
understanding.
Clear and well-
justified use of
philosophical
perspective(s).
Mostly coherent
with minor issues.
Clear and logical
arguments that are
well-structured and
convincing.
Adequate
explanation with
some justification.
Some coherence
issues. Reasoning
connects logically,
but some
conclusions must be
supported, or the
argument
occasionally needs
clarity.
Limited explanation
with weak
justification. Lacks
coherence. The
reasoning shows an
attempt at logic, but
arguments are
often disjointed, and
conclusions are
frequently
unsupported or
illogical.
One page
explanation was
omitted.
5
Spelling and
grammar /
Spelling and
grammar are not
Spelling and
grammar need
Spelling and
grammar need
Needs serious
overall attention.
Needs serious
overall attention
5

3. consistency,
coherence and
overall
language
usage
flawed/consistent;
coherent speech
with little to no
language mistakes.
attention / Speech is
broken, and
language needs
attention.
serious attention.
Speech and
language need
serious attention.
and significant
improvement.
Academic
integrity and
referencing
Excellent adherence
to academic
integrity.
Good adherence to
academic integrity.
Adequate
adherence to
academic integrity.
Limited adherence
to academic
integrity.
Poor adherence to
academic integrity.
5
Referencing Accurate and
comprehensive
referencing in NWU
Harvard style. No
signs of plagiarism.
Mostly accurate
referencing. Minor
errors in citation. No
signs of plagiarism.
Some errors in
referencing. No
signs of plagiarism.
Multiple errors in
referencing.
Questionable
sources.
Major errors in
referencing. Signs of
plagiarism or
academic
dishonesty.
4
Subtotal 49