0% found this document useful (0 votes)
18 views4 pages

Business Experiment Rubric

Uploaded by

xbr9wxm2bf
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
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
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
18 views4 pages

Business Experiment Rubric

Uploaded by

xbr9wxm2bf
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
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.

Criteria 3: Response of Each Test (10 Marks)

Exemplary Proficient Developing Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory


(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)

Exemplary Proficient Developing Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory


(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.

Criteria 5: Impact on Product (20 Marks)

Exemplary Proficient Developing Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory


(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)

Exemplary Developing Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory


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.

Total: /100

You might also like