Skip to main content

iRubric: Case Study Wiki - Part II rubric

find rubric

edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Case Study Wiki - Part II 
Case Study Wiki - Part II
This is a rubric for the application of student development theory to a case study.
Rubric Code: G6A2A5
By mavery
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: Education  
Type: (Other)  
Grade Levels: Graduate

Powered by iRubric Case Study - Part I
  Poor

1 pts

Fair

2 pts

Good

3 pts

Excellent

4 pts

Wiki Content
Content

Poor

Minimal or missing content, 3 or more factual errors.

No details or examples.
Fair

Demonstrates essentialknowledge however contains 1 -2 factual errors.

Very few details or examples.
Good

Demonstrates essential knowledge with no factual errors.

Some details and examples.
Excellent

Demonstrates in-depth knowledge.

Many details and examples.
Organization

Poor

Content has no logical organization.
Fair

Content has some logical organization.
Good

Content uses headings or bulleted lists to organize topics.
Excellent

Content uses headings or bulleted lists to organize topis and group related material.
Analysis of the Problem

Poor

No information related to the central issues in the case or the decisions that need to be made are presented. The introduction does not show an understanding of the case.
Fair

Little information is provided related to the issues in the case or the decisions that need to be made.
Good

The general information relatd to the central issues in the case are included. The decision(s) that need to be made are not clear. Little direction is given to the reader to understand the organization of how the response will be presented.
Excellent

Introduction to the case study clearly articulates the central issues in the case. The decision(s) that need to made are clearly stated. The oganization of how the response will be presented is also included.
Relevant Theories or Theories

Poor

Little information is provided regrading the theories that are listed and only a couple of theories are listed.
Fair

Theories are listed and only a general description of them is provided. The reason for the choice or use of this theory is not provided.
Good

Theories that will be included are provided. Little rationale is provided to why they are appropriate for this situation.
Excellent

The theories being applied to the case are clearly explained including the rationale for why they appropriate to reference in this situation. In addition, the aspect of the theory that will be focused on is also articulated. At least 4 theories are included.
Outlines Available Options

Poor

Only one idea was presented. No additional options were presented in response to the case.
Fair

Only two options were preseted and demonstrated minor evidence of original thinking.
Good

Shows evidence of some critical thought. At least three plausible options were presented and each option included an anylsis of the positive and negative aspects. Little reference was provided related to the additional data needed to make a decision.
Excellent

Many original ideas linked to topic and material. More than three plausible options were presented and each option clearly outlined the postiive and negative aspects. A discussion regarding what additional data would be needed for the decision process was also included.
Final Response

Poor

It isn't clear what the final response. No additional information on how the final decision will be operationalized into practice is presented.
Fair

The final response is not clear and includes elements of multiple options. How the decision was made to go with this course of action is not clear. The plan for implementation is not clear.
Good

The final response is one of the options provided. Little additional information is provided to show how this response will be implemented.
Excellent

The final response is clear and one of the options provided. A clear explanation of how the response will be put into action is provided and a rational for your final decision is included.
Application of Theory to Practice

Poor

No application of theory to practice was used or it was used incorrectly.
Fair

Little application of theory was used to explain the final response. No explanation regrading how the theories work together was included.
Good

Theory was applied to the final response. The aspect of the theory that was being applied wasn't clear. Little explanation regarding how the theories work together to frame the response was provided.
Excellent

Theories were applied that addressed the specific issues outlied. The aspect of the theory that informed the action or decision was clearly articulated. Authors articulated how multiple theories work together to inform a decision/action.
Citation: APA

Poor

Copies material without citing sources.
Fair

Does not give credit to most sources.

Uses improper format for citing sources.
Good

Gives credit to most sources.

Uses proper format for citing format with minor errors.
Excellent

Gives credit to all sources.

Uses proper format for citing sources.
Collaboration
Contribution

Poor

Did not contribute the development of the response for the case.

No contribution or minimal input to development of the wiki.
Fair

Minimal participation was represented toward the response provided. Showed little contribution toward the final response.

Moderate input to development of wiki.
Good

Basic development of ideas on the issue.

Adequate input to development of wiki.
Excellent

Contributed a great deal of information and blended their own ideas on topic with others to come up with a response.

Constant input to development of wiki.
Authorship

Poor

Does not create any content or edit anyone else's responses within the case.
Fair

Contributes to the creation of one part of the content.

Only submits one change/suggestion to other aspects within the case response.
Good

Contributes to the creation of two aspects of the content.

Makes changes/suggestions to two to three other aspects within the case response.
Excellent

Contributes to the creation of more than two aspects of the content.

Makes changes/suggestions to more than three other aspects within the case response.



Keywords:
  • wiki



Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.

n202