1. ICTA Grading Rubrics: Research
0-2 points
3 points
4 points
5 points
Score
Definition.
(Background and context.)
No attempt made to define the topic or the effort was of such poor quality that it could not justify more than minimal recognition.
An attempt was made at defining the topic, however there was evidence of “copying and pasting” in the paper.
Background and context is mostly accurate and complete – there are some unclear components or some minor errors in the method, results or implications.
The student thoroughly defined the topic in their own words demonstrating evidence of accurate research citing multiple references. The student provided an informative background on the topic.
Construct.
(Elements or sub-topics associated with this subject)
No attempt made to explain the components of the topic or the attempt was of such poor quality that it could not warrant more than minimal recognition.
The paper listed the elements or components of the topic, but failed to cite references.
The paper cited two or more sources as references or background on the topic.
The student detailed the components of the topic and their importance (with references).
References.
Case studies cited (e.g. Court rulings, GAO, ASBCA, etc.)
Primary source documents (FAR, DFARS, PGI, etc.)
The paper did not cite a case study or the attempt was of such poor quality that it could not justify more than minimal recognition. Components are missing or inaccurate or unclear.
Cited only a single case reference to support the topic. References selected are not always relevant to the argument or are somewhat vague and incomplete .
References cited are relevant to the argument and are mostly accurate and complete. There are some unclear components or some minor errors in the method, results or implications.
References cited are highly relevant to the argument, and are presented accurately and completely. The method, results, and implications are all presented accurately.
Total for Research (Max = 15 Points)
/15
The Paper Content rubric, which continues on the next slide, is worth a total of 25 points.
CON 280, Day 1

2. ICTA Grading Rubrics: Analysis
0-3 pts.
4-7 pts.
8-9 pts.
10 pts.
Score
Analysis Rubric
(Use applicable definition)
Failed to show any understanding of concepts.
Did not explain concepts.
Did not use concepts and terms in the right context.
Did not use any of the appropriate information, tools, techniques, or processes introduced in class in the analysis.
Did not identify any alternative.
Showed little understanding of concepts.
Did not explain concepts clearly.
Used few of these concepts and terms in the right context.
Used few of the appropriate information, tools, techniques, or processes introduced in class in the analysis.
Identified at least one alternative, but it was not feasible or affordable.
Showed adequate to good understanding of concepts.
Explained concepts clearly.
Used most of the concepts and terms in the right context.
Used the appropriate information, tools, techniques, or processes introduced in class in the analysis.
Identified some feasible and affordable alternatives.
Showed exceptional understanding of concepts.
Explained concepts very clearly.
Consistently used the concepts and terms in the right context.
Used the appropriate information, tools, techniques, or processes introduced in the class and others sources in the analysis.
Identified feasible and affordable alternatives that go beyond the obvious or predictable.
Total for Analysis (Max = 10 Points):
/10
CON 280, Day 1

3. ICTA Grading Rubrics: Documentation
Paper
0-2 points
3 points
4 points
5 points
Score
Professionalism
Many (four or more) errors in citations and paper format noted. The paper failed to provide cohesive thought process or logic. The paper is not indicative of a product created by a contracting professional.
Some errors in citations and paper format noted. The paper provided relatively cohesive thought process or logic. The paper is not always indicative of a product created by a contracting professional.
A few errors in citations and paper format noted. The paper had no more than one misspelled word. The paper had no more than one word used improperly. The paper is generally indicative of a product created by a contracting professional.
Very few to no errors in citations and paper format. The paper contained a high degree of logic and cohesive thought regarding its research and structure is indicative of a contracting professional.
Grammar &
Mechanics
Grammatical errors or spelling and punctuation
Substantially detract from the paper.
Very few grammatical,
spelling or punctuation errors interfere with
reading the paper.
Grammatical errors or spelling and punctuation are rare and do not detract
from the paper.
The paper is free of grammatical errors and spelling and punctuation.
Total for Documentation (Maximum of 10 points)
/10
The Professionalism rubric, which continues on the next slide, is worth a total of 15 points.
CON 280, Day 1

4. ICTA Grading Rubric: Presentation (Student/Team)
0 pts.
.5 pt.
1 pts.
2 pts.
Total
Organization
(Sequence)
Audience cannot understand presentation because there is no sequence of information.
Audience has difficulty following presentation because student jumps around.
Student presents information in logical sequence which audience can follow.
Student presents information in logical, interesting sequence which audience can follow.
Subject Knowledge
(Confidence)
Student does not have grasp of information; student cannot answer questions about subject.
Student is uncomfortable with information and is able to answer only rudimentary questions.
Student is at ease with expected answers to all questions, but fails to elaborate.
Student demonstrates full knowledge (more than required) by answering all class questions with explanations and elaboration.
Mechanics
Student's presentation has four or more spelling errors and/or grammatical errors.
Presentation has three misspellings and/or grammatical errors.
Presentation has no more than two misspellings and/or grammatical errors.
Presentation has no misspellings or grammatical errors.
Eye Contact
Student reads all of report with no eye contact.
Student occasionally uses eye contact, but still reads most of report.
Student maintains eye contact most of the time but frequently returns to notes.
Student maintains eye contact with audience, seldom returning to notes.
Elocution
Student mumbles, incorrectly pronounces terms, and speaks too quietly for students in the back of class to hear.
Student's voice is low. Student incorrectly pronounces terms. Audience members have difficulty hearing presentation.
Student's voice is clear. Student pronounces most words correctly. Most audience members can hear presentation.
Student uses a clear voice and correct, precise pronunciation of terms so that all audience members can hear presentation.
Total Presentation Points (Maximum 10 pts.):
/10
CON 280, Day #