Forum 100%

Fail

0-59%

Borderline fail 60-69%

Fair

70-79%

Good 80-89%

Exceptional 90-100%

Posts reflect limited or

inaccurate understanding of content, with frequent errors in terminology and minimal use of relevant concepts. Connections to course material or peers’ posts are weak, unclear, or entirely absent, and contributions do not advance the discussion. Collaboration is minimal, with little or no meaningful engagement with others’ posts, often limited to brief agreement or irrelevant comments. Posts are inconsistently on time or frequently late, limiting their contribution to the forum. Professional conventions are often disregarded, with tone or language that lacks respect, clarity, or adherence to online communication standards.

Posts reflect basic understanding, with partial or vague use of key concepts and limited examples. Connections to course material and peers’ contributions are minimal and may lack depth or clarity.

Limited engagement with others, mostly agreeing without adding new

perspectives. Posts are generally on time, though often near the deadline, limiting peer interaction. Shows inconsistent observance of conventions, with occasional issues in tone, grammar, or respect.

Posts show adequate understanding of content, using relevant concepts but with some inaccuracies or lack of detail.

Connections to course material and peers’ posts are evident, though they may not consistently deepen the discussion. Engages with peers, typically through agreement or limited elaboration. Posts are timely overall, though not always early enough to drive extended engagement. Follows conventions generally, with a respectful tone and occasional minor lapses in clarity.

Posts reflect solid content knowledge, with appropriate use of concepts and terminology across most posts. Ideas connect well to course topics and

demonstrate relevance to professional practice. Contributions engage with others’ posts, often adding details or posing thoughtful questions. Posts are timely and submitted within deadlines, encouraging participation. Mostly follows conventions, with respectful, clear, and polite

communication. Minor issues in grammar or style may appear.

Posts show sophisticated content understanding, demonstrated through thorough use of relevant concepts and terminology across most posts. Ideas connect clearly to course material and professional practice, with insightful examples and critical engagement.

Consistently engages with peers, prompting new ideas or extending discussions. All posts are timely, fostering an active, ongoing conversation. Adheres to online conventions, showing respect, positivity, and polished language in all interactions.

Written assignment

Fail

0-59%

Borderline fail 60-69%

Fair

70-79%

Good 80-89%

Exceptional 90-100%

Purpose &

Understanding

15%

Very poor coverage of central purpose, goals, Topic questions or arguments with little relevant information evident. Virtually no evidence of understanding or focus.

Minimal understanding of purpose of the study; factual errors evident. Gaps in knowledge and superficial understanding. A few lines of relevant material.

Reasonable understanding, and clearly identifies the purpose, goals, topic questions or argument.

Reflect partial achievement of learning outcomes.

A sound grasp of, and clearly identifies, the purpose, goals, topic questions or argument. Some wider study beyond the classroom content shown.

Effectively describes and explains the central purpose, arguments, topic questions, or goals of the project;

explanation is focused, detailed and compelling. Recognition of alternative forms of evidence beyond that supplied in the classroom.

Content

10%

Content is unclear, inaccurate and/or incomplete. Brief and irrelevant. Descriptive. Only personal views offered. Unsubstanti ated and does not support the purpose, argument or goals of the project. Reader gains no insight through the content of the project.

Limited content that does not really support the purpose of the essay. Very poor coverage. Displays only rudimentary knowledge of the content area. Reader gains few if any insights.

Presents some information that adequately supports the central purpose, arguments, goals, or topic questions. Although parts missing, it demonstrates a level

of partially proficient knowledge of the content area. Reader gains some insights.

Presents clear and appropriate information that adequately supports the central purpose, arguments, goals or research questions of the project. Demonstrates satisfactory knowledge of the content area. Reader gains proficient insights.

Presents balanced, significant and valid information that clearly and convincingly supports the central purpose, arguments, research questions or goals of the project.

Demonstrates indepth and specialized knowledge of the content area. The reader gains important insights.

Organization

10%

Information/content is not logically organized or presented. Topics/paragraphs are frequently

disjointed and fail to make sense together. Reader cannot identify a line of reasoning and loses interest.

Information/content is not, at times, logically organized or presented. Topics/paragraphs are frequently disjointed which makes the content hard to follow. The reader finds it hard to understand the flow of the report.

Information/conte nt is presented in a reasonable sequence. Topic/p aragraph transition is unclear in places with linkages for the most part. Reader can generally understand and follow the line of reasoning, although work needed to be proficiently organized.

Information/content is presented in a clear and understandable sequence. Topic/paragraph transition is good with clear linkages between sections and arguments. Reader can understand and follow the line of reasoning.

Information/content is presented in a logical, interesting and effective sequence. Topics and arguments flow smoothly and coherently from one to another and are clearly linked. Reader can easily follow the line of reasoning and enjoyed reading the report.

Style & Tone

5%

Writing is poor, unclear and unengaging, and the reader finds it difficult to read and maintain interest. Tone is not professional or suitable for an academic discussion project. A

Writing is unengaging and reader finds it difficult to maintain interest. Tone is not consistently professional or suitable for an academic discussion. Work needed on

Writing is usually engaging and keeps the reader’s attention. Tone is generally appropriate for an academic discussion although a clearer and more professional style and tone is needed.

Writing style and tone is generally good and sustains interest throughout. Tone is professional and appropriate for an academic research project.

Writing is compelling and sustains interest throughout. Tone is consistently professional and appropriate for an academic research project.

reorganization and rewrite is needed.

academic writing style.

Use of

References

10%

Little or no evidence of reference sources in the report. Content not supported and based on unsubstantiated views.

Most references are from unknown

sources with little professional grounding and have uncertain reliability. Few if any appropriate citations are provided. Reader doubts the validity of much of the material.

Professionally legitimate references are generally used. Fair citations are presented in most cases. However, some of the information/content/ evidence comes from sources that are reliable.

Professionally and academically legitimate references are used. Clear and accurate citations are presented in most cases. The majority of the

information/content /evidence comes from sources that are reliable.

Presents compelling evidence from professionally and legitimate sources. Attribution is clear and accurate. References are 75% from good sources.

Formatting

5%

Research project exhibits no formatting, or frequent and significant

errors in

Harvard formatting.

There are too many errors in the Harvard formatting to be acceptable as a partially proficient piece.

Harvard formatting is employed in the research project with minor errors. A review and rework of format and style of referencing in text and in the bibliography is needed.

Harvard formatting is used accurately and consistently throughout the research project, although some issues are apparent as the reader is unable to find sources.

Harvard formatting is used accurately and

consistently throughout the research project. Accurate hyperlinks are included where required, making it easy for readers to review sources.

Written

Communication

Skills

15%

The written project exhibits multiple errors in grammar, sentence structure and/or spelling. Inadequate writing

skills (e.g.,

weaknesses in language facility and mechanics) hinder readability and contribute to an ineffective research project.

The written project exhibits errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling. The written project comes across as untidy and not properly checked for mistakes. Errors

present in written communication make readability frustrating.

The written essay displays good word choice, language conventions and mechanics with a few minor errors in spelling, grammar, sentence structure and/or punctuation. Errors do not represent a major distraction or obscure meaning.

The readability of the essay is good due to

the clarity of language used. Grammar, spelling and punctuation is without error. Spelling and grammar thoroughly checked.

The readability of the essay is enhanced by facility in language use/word choice. Excellent mechanics and syntactic variety. Uses language conventions

effectively (e.g., spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, paragraphing, grammar, etc.).

Visual/Aesthetic

Design

10%

Visual design is chaotic and lacks coherence. Little to no consideration has been given to layout, typography, or color schemes, resulting in an unprofessional and

ineffective presentation.

Visual elements are disorganized and inconsistent, making it difficult to follow the content. Basic effort is evident, but poor layout, illegible text, or clashing colors detract from readability and understanding.

Visual elements are somewhat organized but lack consistency or coherence. Design choices (e.g., fonts, colors) occasionally distract from content but are usable.

Visual elements are organized and visually appealing, with most design choices enhancing understanding and engagement. Some minor improvements needed for a professional finish.

Outstanding use of visuals that are professional, cohesive, and engaging. Design choices (e.g., color, layout, typography) greatly enhance the message and are exceptionally polished.

Analytical /

Critical Thinking

Skills

15%

The essay question, concept or idea is not

clearly articulated, or its component elements are not identified or described. The information is poorly organized, categorized and/or not examined; it is often inaccurate or

incomplete. Presents little if any analysis or

Research problem, concept or idea is not clearly articulated at times and confusing. The information is badly organized, categorized, and/or only superficially examined; but the information is often incomplete. Presents limited analysis or

Adequately identifies and describes (or sketches out) the essay problem, concept or idea and its components. Gathers and examines information relating to the essay question, concept or idea; presents and appraises the information with

Formulates a clear description of the essay problem, concept or idea, and specifies major elements to be examined. Selects information appropriate to addressing the problem, concept or idea; accurately and appropriately analyses and

Effectively formulates a clear description of the essay problem, concept or idea, and specifies major elements to be examined. Selects and prioritizes information appropriate to addressing the problem, concept, or idea; accurately and

interpretation; inaccurately and/or inappropriately applies research methods, techniques, models, frameworks and/or theories to the analysis. Presents few solutions or conclusions; solutions or conclusions are often not well supported, are inaccurate and/or inconsistent, and are presented in a vague or rudimentary manner.

interpretation; inaccurately and/or inappropriately applies techniques, models, and frameworks to the analysis. Presents some solutions or conclusions but they are often not well supported, or logical.

some minor inconsistencies, irrelevance, or omissions. Generally, applies appropriate analytical methods, techniques, models, frameworks, although with inaccuracies.

Outlines solutions or conclusions that are somewhat logical an

Related Tags