We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4
Business Experiment Rubric
The following is the Business Experiment rubric. This is a Major assignment with 6 criteria. There is a total of 100 marks for this assignment.
Criteria 1: Execution of Tests (20 Marks)
Developing Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory
Exemplary (17-20 marks) Proficient (13-16 marks) (9-12 marks) (5-8 marks) (0-7 marks) Executed 2+ tests and both Executed 2+ tests and both Execution is are implemented are implemented Executed 2+ tests and at inconsistent, with Execution is poor, with with exceptional execution, with excellent execution, least one test is limited effort, little to no effort, demonstrating meticulous demonstrating excellent adequately executed but engagement, or attention minimal engagement, attention to detail, high attention to detail, strong lacks consistency or to detail in one or both and lacking meaningful engagement, and sustained engagement, and excellent engagement. The other methods. Minimal detail or adaptation. effort. Adaptations are effort. Adaptations are method may show adaptations are made, Methods are poorly made proactively based on made proactively based on weaker performance, showing a reactive implemented, with no initial results or feedback, initial results or feedback, with limited attention to approach rather than clear planning, maximizing effectiveness. maximizing effectiveness. detail. Adaptations are proactive problem- ineffective resource use, Execution reflects strategic Execution reflects strategic minimal, affecting solving. Resource use is and no creativity. planning and excellent use planning and very good overall effectiveness. weak, with clear gaps in of resources use of resources planning and creativity. Criteria 2: Explanation of Selection (20 Marks)
Developing Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory
Exemplary (17-20 marks) Proficient (13-16 marks) (9-12 marks) (5-8 marks) (0-7 marks) Provides a clear, thorough Provides a reasonable Offers basic rationale for Provides limited or Offers little to no rationale for selecting 2+ rationale for selecting 2+ 1+ test selection, with unclear rationale for explanation for test tests, fully linking choices tests, with clear limited or vague selecting 1+ tests. selection. No clear link to specific product connections to product connections to product Weak or incomplete to product assumptions, assumptions, goals, or assumptions, goals, or assumptions or goals. connection to product goals, or challenges. challenges. Explains how challenges. However, some Some relevance is assumptions, goals, or Test choices appear each test addresses key reasoning may lack depth present, but reasoning risks. Test selection random or unsupported unknowns or risks, with or detailed examples. Links lacks clarity, depth, or seems arbitrary, with by reasoning, with no well-supported reasoning. between test selection and specific examples. The little depth or alignment consideration for The rationale is strongly product strategy are mostly rationale may not to the product’s overall addressing unknowns or aligned with the overall clear but may not be fully adequately reflect key objectives. risks. product. explored. challenges or risks.
(9-10 marks) (7-8 marks) (5-6 marks) (3-4 marks) (0-2 marks) Provides detailed descriptions of Describes responses for Offers no clear Gives general or limited Provides vague or user/customer responses each test but lacks some description of responses with little unclear responses. Fails for each test, outlining detail on user/customer user/customer detail on user to describe user specific feedback, interactions. Provides some responses. Lacks data, interactions. Lacks interaction, feedback, or behaviors, or data points. data, but missing deeper feedback, or behavior specificity in feedback or behavior in any Uses real data or direct feedback or behavior analysis, with little to no data points. meaningful detail. quotes to illustrate descriptions. connection to the tests. responses. *For online interactions, provide the link and/or appropriate screenshots for verification and support Criteria 4: Findings and Insights (20 marks)
(17-20 marks) (13-16 marks) (9-12 marks) (5-8 marks) (0-4 marks) Offers clear, well-defined insights derived from Provides relevant Offers general findings, Provides minimal or Provides no each test, showing a insights for each test, with but connections to test unclear insights, with meaningful insights or strong understanding of clear connections to most results and data are weak connections to the findings from the tests. the findings. Explanations data points. Explanations vague or unclear. data. Explanations lack Explanations are are logical, supported by show how findings were Explanations of how detail, making it absent, disconnected specific data points, and derived, but some areas insights were derived difficult to see how the from the data, or lack effectively demonstrate may lack depth or detailed are present but insights relate to the test clarity, making it the correlation between connections to the data. incomplete, making it results. impossible to findings and the overall hard to fully understand understand the product analysis actions the reasoning. findings.
(17-20 marks) (13-16 marks) (9-12 marks) (5-8 marks) (0-4 marks) Provides a clear, detailed explanation of how the Offers no meaningful Describes changes or Identifies potential findings will impact the Provides little or no explanation for how adjustments based on changes but weakly product, identifying explanation for how findings will impact the findings but lacks depth or connects them to specific changes, findings will impact the product. Changes are detail in some areas. findings. Changes are adjustments, or decisions product. Changes are unclear, unsupported by Connections to findings are vague, and reasoning made as a result. Explains superficial or not clearly insights, or absent present but not fully behind adjustments is not why certain aspects will linked to insights. altogether. explored. well explained. change or remain the same with strong reasoning. Criteria 6: Grammar, Spelling, and Structure (10 Marks)
Proficient (7-8 marks) (9-10 marks) (5-6 marks) (3-4 marks) (0-2 marks) Frequent grammar, Significant and Noticeable errors in Major grammar, Writing has minor spelling, or punctuation consistent grammar, grammar, spelling, or spelling, or punctuation grammatical, spelling, and errors, but they do not spelling, or punctuation punctuation that do not errors that make sections punctuation errors. severely affect errors throughout. impede understanding. difficult to understand. Sentences are well- readability. Some Sentence structure is Sentence structure is Sentence structure is structured, clear, and sentences may be poor, making the mostly clear with some weak, and ideas do not concise. Logical flow and awkward or unclear. writing difficult to minor issues. Flow and flow well. Transitions transitions between ideas Transitions between understand. No clear transitions are generally are missing or are excellent. ideas are somewhat structure or flow effective. ineffective. lacking. between ideas.
Hot Dog - (Winner of The 2023 Caldecott Medal) - Doug Salati Axis 360 (Digital Media Service) - Place of Publication Not Identified, 2022 - Knopf - 9780593308431 - Anna's Archive
NPD-BC Nursing Professional Development Exam Prep 2025–2026: Study Guide With 400+ Practice Tests, Full-Length Exams, Strategies & Tips To Pass On Your First Try