Undergraduate Case Analysis Rubric

20 Points Possible

Levels of Achievement
Criteria Completely Slightly Inadequate Competent Excellent
Inadequate
Problem 1.5 Points 2 Points 2.5 Points 3 Points
identification Fails to identify the main Some difficulties in Some success identifying Accurately identifies
ethical issues; Does not identifying the main the main ethical issues; main ethical issues;
show understanding of ethical issues; some Shows some Shows good
why different difficulties understanding of why understanding of why
approaches may be understanding why different approaches different approaches
taken to this problem different approaches may be taken to this may be taken to this
and why stakeholders may be taken to this problem and why problem, and why
may disagree. problem and why stakeholders may stakeholders may
stakeholders may disagree disagree.
disagree.
Providing 1.5 Points 2 Points 2.5 Points 3 Points
empirical Fails to provide any, or Some difficulties in Some success in making Accurately identifies
information accurate empirical identifying sufficient or sufficient and relevant sufficient and relevant
and use of information; makes relevant information; empirical claims and in empirical information,
sources empirical claims with no insufficient support for providing sufficient and draws on support
evidence to back them empirical claims from support for them from a from sufficient and
up; uses no or reliable sources; us of reasonable number of reliable sources.
inappropriate sources. few or somewhat reliable sources.
inappropriate sources.
Engages with 1.5 Points 2 Points 2.5 Points 3 Points
appropriate Fails to discuss a range of Discusses a very limited Some success in Successfully discusses a
range of value appropriate values that range of appropriate discussing a range of range of appropriate
concerns might be at stake values that may be at appropriate values that might be at
(egjustice, suffering, stake(egjustice, valuesthat might be at stake (eg justice,
privacy, liberty, suffering,liberty, privacy, stake (egjustice, suffering, liberty,
naturalness). naturalness). suffering, liberty, privacy, naturalness).
privacy, naturalness).
Open-minded 1.5 Points 2 Points 2.5 Points 3 Points
and fair Assumes basic position Basic position is only Sufficient reasons to Basic position effectively
discussion without arguing for it; partially defended; some support basic position; justified; fair
shows obvious bias; is biases evident; no biases evident; no presentation of others'
unfair in argument; sets occasional unfairness in unfairness in argument; positions; charitable
up straw man argument; a tendency to no caricature of others' interpretation of others'
arguments. caricature others' arguments arguments.
arguments.
 Pg 2

Criteria Completely Slightly Inadequate Competent Excellent

Inadequate
Thinking 1.5 Points 2 Points 2.5 Points 3 Points
critically Complete lack of critical Insufficient degree of Some degree of critical Engages critically with
about own thinking about sources critical thinking about thinking about sources sources and arguments
and others' and arguments used; sources and arguments and arguments used; used, and offers
views doesn't offer objection used; considers limited some objections to own plausible objections to
to own argument. objections to own argument. his or her own argument.
argument.
Makes an 1.5 Points 2 Points 2.5 Points 3 Points
appropriate Fails to make an Argument is weak and A comprehensible A clear and rigorously
argument argument at all; fails to difficult to follow; argument is present; the developed argument is
make an ethical argument doesn't clearly argument makes an present; the argument
argument; argument draw on ethical ideas; ethical case and directly addresses ethical
fails to answer the some disassociation addresses the prompt; questions and clearly
prompt; no creativity is between prompt and some creativity is responds to the prompt;
expressed. response; little creativity expressed where the argument displays
is expressed. relevant. creativity where
relevant.
Writing 0.8 Points 1.2 Points 1.6 Points 2 Points
Quality Poor spelling and Some spelling and Few grammatical or Consistently uses correct
grammar throughout. grammar errors. Does spelling errors. Ideas are grammar with rare
Writing is barely not express opinions or expressed reasonably misspellings. Expresses
coherent. No indication ideas clearly.Only vague clearly. Some guidance ideas in a clear and
of what the argument guidance as to how the as to what the argument concise manner. Clear
will be or how the case case study analysis will will be and how the case guidance given as to
study analysis will be be structured at the analysis will be what the argument will
structured at the beginning of the analysis. structured at the be and how the case
beginning of the analysis. beginning of the analysis. study analysis will be
structured at the
beginning of the analysis.