|
Manager Interview Paper Grading Rubric |
|||
|
Section and Sub-Section |
Total Points |
Credit |
|
|
Introduction: |
4 |
|
|
|
|
Introduces the purpose of the paper |
|
+2 |
|
|
Identifies managers (may use an alias to be anonymous) |
|
+1 |
|
|
Identifies managers' job titles |
|
+1 |
|
|
- minus .5 for very brief; minus 1 for missing (all per subsection) |
|
|
|
General Background & Responsibilities: |
6 |
|
|
|
|
Identifies whether managers have taken a course in OB and their perception of it (remembers most, relevance) |
|
+3 |
|
|
Discusses manager's most liked and least liked aspect of the job |
|
+3 |
|
|
- minus .5 or 1 for minor omissions or brevity; minus 2 for major issues (all per sub-section) |
|
|
|
Focus Section: |
22 |
|
|
|
|
Quality of interview questions |
|
+5 |
|
|
Quality of narrative summary of responses |
|
+6 |
|
|
Links response to relevant course theory/concepts |
|
+10 |
|
|
Includes citations |
|
+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conclusions: |
8 |
|
|
|
|
Summarizes thoughts/ideas/reflects on the interviewer's responses and implication for OB and their career |
|
+8 |
|
|
- minus .5 for brief, but meaningful discussion; minus 1 for a general or surface-level discussion of the take-away points; minus 2 for omission |
|
|
|
Flow of Writing: |
4 |
|
|
|
|
This reader thinks the clear, concise writing in this document made it enjoyable to read. The writer uses a lot of sentence variety and strong word choices. |
|
4 |
|
|
This reader thinks the writing in this document is good, but perhaps the writer could have introduced a little more variety and/or written in a more concise fashion. |
|
3 |
|
|
This reader thinks some of the writing is awkward, and/or the writer relies too heavily on the same kind of sentence structure. |
|
2 |
|
|
This reader thinks much of the writing in this document is awkward, repetitive, and/or wordy. The writing was not engaging. |
|
1 |
|
Grammar & Writing Mechanics: |
4 |
|
|
|
|
This reader noticed few errors, if any. The document is clear, and the writer shows considerable mastery of the language. |
|
4 |
|
|
This reader noticed some grammatical/mechanical errors, but those errors did not interfere with the reader’s understanding of the document’s purpose. |
|
3 |
|
|
This reader noticed numerous grammatical/mechanical errors, and those errors interfered at times with the reader’s understanding of the document’s purpose and/or caused the reader to question the skill and expertise of the writer. |
|
2 |
|
|
This reader noticed many grammatical/mechanical errors. The reader felt the number of errors made the document difficult to understand, and the reader questioned the writer’s professionalism because of these recurrent mistakes. |
|
1 |
|
Formatted Correctly: |
2 |
|
|
|
|
Title page, Page Numbers, Font/Spacing, Neatness |
|
|
|
|
- minus .5 for issues |
|
|
|
|
Total Possible Points |
50 |
|