1. Grading Scheme
1.1. Presentation of Assigned Topic 60%
1.1.1. Quality analysis
1.1.1.1. Major issues are addressed
1.1.1.2. Relevant tools are used properly
1.1.1.3. Assumptions for analysis are stated clearly
1.1.1.4. Causes of the problems are identified in the analysis
1.1.2. Exhibits
1.1.2.1. Analyses in the exhibits are done correctly
1.1.2.2. Exhibits support and clarify key points
1.1.2.3. Not more than 7 exhibits
1.1.3. Recommendations
1.1.3.1. Criteria for selecting alternative recommendations are given
1.1.3.2. Criteria are appropriate
1.1.3.3. Plan of action is logical linked to the analysis
1.1.3.4. Plan of action is specific, complete and practical
1.1.3.5. Recommendations are likely to achieve intended results
1.1.4. Presentations
1.1.4.1. Report is not long, 2000 words max
1.1.4.2. Presentation is professionally done
1.1.4.3. Report is consistent and effectively sells its recommendations
1.2. Exercises on Critical Thinking 30%
1.2.1. Examination
1.2.2. Essays
1.2.3. Course synthesis
1.2.4. Course project
1.3. Class participation 10%
1.3.1. Contextual
1.3.1.1. Willingness to participate and attentive to discussion
1.3.2. Innovative
1.3.2.1. There is willingness to test new ideas and comments are not confrontational.
1.3.3. Insightful
1.3.3.1. Comments are appropriate and indicates insightful analysis of case data
1.3.4. Relevant
1.3.4.1. Comments are relevant to current discussion and linked to comments of others
1.3.5. Supported
1.3.5.1. Comments clarify important aspects of earlier ideas and lead to clearer statement of relevant concepts and issues
2. Grading Scale
2.1. Summa Cum Laude
2.1.1. 1.19 to 1.0
2.1.1.1. 94.99 to 100
2.1.1.1.1. Excellent
2.2. Magna Cum Laude
2.2.1. 1.29 to 1.2
2.2.1.1. 92.49 to 95
2.2.1.1.1. Superior
2.3. Cum Laude
2.3.1. 1.39 to 1.3
2.3.1.1. 90.99 to 92.5
2.3.1.1.1. Very Satisfactory
2.4. Passed
2.4.1. 2.0 to 1.4
2.4.1.1. 75 to 90
2.4.1.1.1. Satisfactory