You are on page 1of 18

RMIT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY VIETNAM

ACCT 2118 Industry Project


Industry Project Proposal Marking Rubric (TOTAL 15%)

PART 1: PROJECT PROPOSAL (15%)


Area/Weighting

1. Overview of the issue


- introduction of the issue (situational
analysis)

Excellent
(HD) Score: 8-10

-excellent explanation and overview of the issue which is


well-supported by strong evidence
-thesis statement clearly and concisely states the papers
purpose in one or two sentences, which is engaging, and
thought provoking.

(15%)

Problem Identification
-very clear and specific focus
- problem statement/question is engaging and provocative
- skillful use of complementary analytical tools leading to
excellent insights into the identified problem(s)

2. Problem Identification
- clear identification of the problem
- brief outline of the project's objectives
(25%)

Project objectives
-explicit SMART aims and/or objectives
-full and convincing justification is given

Page 1 of 18

RMIT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY VIETNAM


ACCT 2118 Industry Project
Industry Project Proposal Marking Rubric (TOTAL 15%)

PART 1: PROJECT PROPOSAL (15%)


Area/Weighting

2. Problem Identification
- clear identification of the problem
- brief outline of the project's objectives

Problem Identification
Excellent
(HD)
Score:
-very
clear8-10
and specific focus
- problem statement/question is engaging and provocative
- skillful use of complementary analytical tools leading to
excellent insights into the identified problem(s)
Project objectives
-explicit SMART aims and/or objectives
-full and convincing justification is given

(25%)

Critical evaluation & position


- literature is critically and comprehensively evaluated with
strong attention to detail and demonstrates excellent
synthesis of sources and viewpoints
Page 2 of 18

RMIT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY VIETNAM


ACCT 2118 Industry Project
Industry Project Proposal Marking Rubric (TOTAL 15%)
Critical evaluation & position

PART 1: PROJECT PROPOSAL


- literature is (15%)
critically and comprehensively
Area/Weighting

evaluated with
strong
Excellentattention to detail and demonstrates excellent
(HD) Score: 8-10
synthesis
of sources and viewpoints
- review very strongly and clearly positions the project
proposal thesis in context of the current research/knowledge

Relevance & Quality


- discerning selection of literature that directly relates to the
project proposal
3. Literature Review (min 3 good quality -references are primarily peer-reviewed professional
journals or other approved sources (e.g., government
articles)
- quality and relevant literature chosen documents, etc.).
- appropriate referencing
(25%)

Page 3 of 18

RMIT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY VIETNAM


ACCT 2118 Industry Project
Industry Project Proposal Marking Rubric (TOTAL 15%)

PART 1: PROJECT PROPOSAL (15%)


Area/Weighting

Excellent
(HD) Score: 8-10

Research Methodology(10%)
-excellent and insightful rationale for research approach
and data collection methods
- shows potential ability to systematically gather highly
relevant information
-critical awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of
approach
4. Research Methodology
- research methods are well explained
and show a clear direction
- Gantt chart for execution of project
report (weeks 5 - week 12) is well
planned
(20%)

Gantt Chart (5%)


- Gantt chart is very well scheduled and looks very feasible.
Responsibilities and critical path is well considered.
Referencing (5%)
- harvard style is used; appropriate & consistent in-text
citations with little to no errors
- accurate & complete reference list in harvard style

Page 4 of 18

RMIT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY VIETNAM


ACCT 2118 Industry Project
Industry Project Proposal Marking Rubric (TOTAL 15%)

Research Methodology(10%)
PART 1: PROJECT PROPOSAL
(15%)
-excellent and insightful rationale for research approach
Area/Weighting

Excellent
and data collection
(HD) Score: 8-10

methods

- shows potential ability to systematically gather highly


relevant information
-critical awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of
approach
4. Research Methodology
- research methods are well explained
and show a clear direction
- Gantt chart for execution of project
report (weeks 5 - week 12) is well
planned
(20%)

Gantt Chart (5%)


- Gantt chart is very well scheduled and looks very feasible.
Responsibilities and critical path is well considered.
Referencing (5%)
- harvard style is used; appropriate & consistent in-text
citations with little to no errors
- accurate & complete reference list in harvard style

Page 5 of 18

RMIT INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY VIETNAM


ACCT 2118 Industry Project
Industry Project Proposal Marking Rubric (TOTAL 15%)

PART 1: PROJECT PROPOSAL (15%)


Area/Weighting

Excellent
(HD) Score: 8-10

Language
-appropriate language, clear, accurate & to maximum effect
- excellent to outstanding command of grammar & spelling;
editing is thorough
5. Appropriate Documentation
- vocabulary/grammar/structures
suitable for a client business proposal
- logical sequence of text, readability
and structure

Logical sequence
- outstanding logical flow and cohesion
- text and data presented astutely, creatively and effectively

(15%)

Adapted from:
Dissertation Marking Criteria & Standards Information for Students.pdf
http://www.ling.mq.edu.au/postgraduate/resources/

Page 6 of 18

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS MARKING RUBRIC ONLY REFERS TO CRITERIA TO MARKING YOUR PROJECT PROPOSAL COMPONENT WORTH 15
THE REMAINING 10% CONTRIBUTION MARK TOWARDS ASSIGNMENT 1.

Reasonable
(Di) Score: 7

Reasonable
(Cr) Score: 6

-very good explanation and overview of the issue which is


supported by good evidence

- good explanation and overview of the issue backed by


reasonable evidence

-thesis statement clearly states the papers purpose in one or -thesis statement states the papers purpose in one or two
two sentences
sentences

Problem Identification
- clear and specific focus
- problem statement/question posed is challenging
- very good use of analytical tools that logically leads to
identified causes/problems
Project objectives
-well-defined SMART aims and/or objectives
- convincing justification is given

Problem Identification
- clear focus
- problem statement/question lends itself to readily available
answers
- good use of 2 or more analytical tools with some sound
reasoning; some gaps are evident in the analysis
Project objectives
- clear aims and objectives that are generally SMART
- clear and justified rationale is given

Page 7 of 18

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS MARKING RUBRIC ONLY REFERS TO CRITERIA TO MARKING YOUR PROJECT PROPOSAL COMPONENT WORTH 15
THE REMAINING 10% CONTRIBUTION MARK TOWARDS ASSIGNMENT 1.

Problem Identification
Reasonable
(Di)
Score:
7 specific focus
- clear
and
- problem statement/question posed is challenging
- very good use of analytical tools that logically leads to
identified causes/problems

Problem Identification
Reasonable
(Cr)
Score:
6
- clear
focus
- problem statement/question lends itself to readily available
answers
- good use of 2 or more analytical tools with some sound
reasoning; some gaps are evident in the analysis

Project objectives
-well-defined SMART aims and/or objectives
- convincing justification is given

Project objectives
- clear aims and objectives that are generally SMART
- clear and justified rationale is given

Critical evaluation & position


Critical evaluation & position
- literature is critically and comprehensively evaluated and - literature is critically evaluated and demonstrates good
demonstrates very good synthesis of sources and viewpoints synthesis of sources and viewpoints
- review strongly positions project proposal thesis in context

Page 8 of 18

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS MARKING RUBRIC ONLY REFERS TO CRITERIA TO MARKING YOUR PROJECT PROPOSAL COMPONENT WORTH 15
THE REMAINING 10% CONTRIBUTION MARK TOWARDS ASSIGNMENT 1.

Critical evaluation & position


Critical evaluation & position
- literature is critically and comprehensively evaluated and - literature is critically evaluated and demonstrates good
demonstrates
very good synthesis of sources and viewpoints synthesis
Reasonable
Reasonableof sources and viewpoints
(Di) Score: 7

(Cr) Score: 6

- review strongly positions project proposal thesis in context


of the current research/knowledge

-review effectively positions project proposal thesis in context


of the current research/knowledge

Relevance & Quality


- comprehensive reading & literature is clearly related to
Relevance & Quality
project proposal.
- wide reading that relates to the project proposal
-most of the references are professionally legitimate, a few
- many of the references are professionally legitimate, a few
are questionable (e.g., trade books, internet sources, popular are questionable (e.g., trade books, internet sources, popular
magazines, newspapers ).
magazines, newspapers ).

Page 9 of 18

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS MARKING RUBRIC ONLY REFERS TO CRITERIA TO MARKING YOUR PROJECT PROPOSAL COMPONENT WORTH 15
THE REMAINING 10% CONTRIBUTION MARK TOWARDS ASSIGNMENT 1.

Reasonable
(Di) Score: 7

Reasonable
(Cr) Score: 6

Research Methodology(10%)
- comprehensive and persuasive rationale for research
approach and data collection methods

Research Methodology(10%)
- fairly comprehensive rationale for research approach and
data collection methods

- shows potential ability to gather highly relevant information - shows potential ability to gather useful and appropriate
information
- deep awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of
approach
-awareness of strengths and weaknesses of approach
Gantt Chart (5%)
- Gantt chart looks feasible and responsibilities are outlined
well. A clear schedule is given and there is consideration for
the critical path and dependencies.

Gantt Chart (5%)


- Gantt chart has reasonable feasiblity and responsibilities are
outlined. Reasonable consideration of the critical path
although the schedule may look to be too ambitious

Referencing (5%)
- harvard style is used; appropriate & consistent in-text
citations with minor errors

Referencing (5%)
- harvard style is used; mostly accurate & consistent in-text
citations with some errors

-accurate & complete reference list in harvard style

- mostly accurate reference list in harvard style

Page 10 of 18

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS MARKING RUBRIC ONLY REFERS TO CRITERIA TO MARKING YOUR PROJECT PROPOSAL COMPONENT WORTH 15
THE REMAINING 10% CONTRIBUTION MARK TOWARDS ASSIGNMENT 1.

Research Methodology(10%)
- comprehensive and persuasive rationale for research
Reasonable
approach and data collection methods

Research Methodology(10%)
- fairly comprehensive rationale for research approach and
Reasonable
data collection methods

(Di) Score: 7

(Cr) Score: 6

- shows potential ability to gather highly relevant information - shows potential ability to gather useful and appropriate
information
- deep awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of
approach
-awareness of strengths and weaknesses of approach
Gantt Chart (5%)
- Gantt chart looks feasible and responsibilities are outlined
well. A clear schedule is given and there is consideration for
the critical path and dependencies.

Gantt Chart (5%)


- Gantt chart has reasonable feasiblity and responsibilities are
outlined. Reasonable consideration of the critical path
although the schedule may look to be too ambitious

Referencing (5%)
- harvard style is used; appropriate & consistent in-text
citations with minor errors

Referencing (5%)
- harvard style is used; mostly accurate & consistent in-text
citations with some errors

-accurate & complete reference list in harvard style

- mostly accurate reference list in harvard style

Page 11 of 18

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS MARKING RUBRIC ONLY REFERS TO CRITERIA TO MARKING YOUR PROJECT PROPOSAL COMPONENT WORTH 15
THE REMAINING 10% CONTRIBUTION MARK TOWARDS ASSIGNMENT 1.

Reasonable
(Di) Score: 7

Reasonable
(Cr) Score: 6

Language
Language
-appropriate language, clear, accurate & effective
-appropriate language, clear and accurate but with some
- very good command of grammar & spelling; very few typos errors
- reasonable to good command of grammar & spelling; some
Logical sequence
typos present
- very good logical flow and cohesion
- text and data presented discerningly and effectively
Logical sequence
- good logical flow and cohesion
- text and data presented effectively for the most part

Page 12 of 18

WORTH 15%. THIS RUBRIC DOES NOT INCLUDE CRITERIA FOR

Weak
(NN/PA) Score:1- 5

-adequate explanation and overview of the issue, backed by


some some evidence. However, this needs more development
-thesis statement states the paper's purpose but this is
incomplete and/or unfocused
**Fail - incoherent overview, does not sufficiently cover
background. No thesis statement given

Problem Identification
- some focus but lacking clarity
- problem statement/question was developed requiring little
creative thought
- satisfactorily uses 2 or more analytical tools but overall
findings are a bit superfical
Project objectives
- appropriate aims and objectives,some of which are SMART
- reasonable justification is given
**Fail - specific problem is not identified and/or does not
relate to thesis statement. Objectives are not SMART,

Page 13 of 18

WORTH 15%. THIS RUBRIC DOES NOT INCLUDE CRITERIA FOR

Problem Identification
Weak
(NN/PA)
5 lacking clarity
- someScore:1focus but
- problem statement/question was developed requiring little
creative thought
- satisfactorily uses 2 or more analytical tools but overall
findings are a bit superfical
Project objectives
- appropriate aims and objectives,some of which are SMART
- reasonable justification is given
**Fail - specific problem is not identified and/or does not
relate to thesis statement. Objectives are not SMART,
weak or little justification is given. Only 1 or no analytical
tool used.

Critical evaluation & position


- literature is adequately evaluated and demonstrates some
ability to synthesise sources and viewpoints
Page 14 of 18

WORTH 15%. THIS RUBRIC DOES NOT INCLUDE CRITERIA FOR

Critical evaluation & position


- literature is adequately evaluated and demonstrates some
ability
Weak to synthesise sources and viewpoints
(NN/PA) Score:1- 5

- review satisfactorily positions project proposal thesis in


context of the current research/knowledge
Relevance & Quality
- satisfactory amount of literature that mostly relates to
project proposal
- most of the references are from sources that are not peerreviewed and have uncertain reliability.
- at least 3 of the references come from credible/good
sources
**Fail - Poor literature review that does not relate to the project
proposal thesis. No professionally or academically reliable sources
used

Page 15 of 18

WORTH 15%. THIS RUBRIC DOES NOT INCLUDE CRITERIA FOR

Weak
(NN/PA) Score:1- 5

Research Methodology(10%)
- adequate rationale for research approach and data
collection methods
-appropriate methods chosen, but without full awareness of
reliability and validity issues
- some awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of
approach; some inaccuracies may be present in
understanding
Gantt Chart (5%)
- Gantt chart is too simple and does not have a realistic
schedule or timeline.
Referencing (5%)
- uses harvard style but with significant inconsistencies
and/or omissions in the in-text citations and reference list
**Fail - i. Inappropriate methods, no rationale given, little to no
awareness demonstrated of strengths and weaknesses of
approach,
ii. incomplete or inaccurate citations and no way to check the
validity of the information gathered

Page 16 of 18

WORTH 15%. THIS RUBRIC DOES NOT INCLUDE CRITERIA FOR

Research Methodology(10%)
- adequate rationale for research approach and data
Weak
collection methods
(NN/PA) Score:1- 5
-appropriate methods chosen, but without full awareness of
reliability and validity issues
- some awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of
approach; some inaccuracies may be present in
understanding
Gantt Chart (5%)
- Gantt chart is too simple and does not have a realistic
schedule or timeline.
Referencing (5%)
- uses harvard style but with significant inconsistencies
and/or omissions in the in-text citations and reference list
**Fail - i. Inappropriate methods, no rationale given, little to no
awareness demonstrated of strengths and weaknesses of
approach,
ii. incomplete or inaccurate citations and no way to check the
validity of the information gathered

Page 17 of 18

WORTH 15%. THIS RUBRIC DOES NOT INCLUDE CRITERIA FOR

Weak
(NN/PA) Score:1- 5

Language
- appropriate language for the most part but with significant
errors
- adequate command of grammar and spelling, but several
typos present
Logical sequence
- most sections have logical flow and cohesion
- text and data presented satisfactorily, with some areas
needing improvement
**Fail -Does not meet minimum standards stated above

Page 18 of 18