Evaluation Results
E-Care Support Request Form Author: Shahir Yasin Date Evaluated: 02/20/2013 04:55:49 PM (MST) DRF template: JDT2 Human Resources (V2 GRADUATE-0610) Program: JDT2 Human Resources (V2 GRADUATE-0610)-PA Evaluation Method: Using Rubric

Evaluation Summary for Human Resources: JDT Task 3
Final Score: Does not Meet Overall comments: An outstanding presentation has been provided, effectively discussing succession planning and team performance. Only two aspects, pre appraisal activities and steps the CEO and board of directors should take to implement the key points covered in the presentation require addition support.

Detailed Results (Rubric used: JDT Task 3)
Articulation of Response (clarity, organization, mechanics) (0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides limited articulation of response.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides adequate articulation of response.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides substantial articulation of response.

The candidate provides The candidate provides unsatisfactory articulation weak articulation of of response. response.

Criterion Score: 4.00 A1. Optimal Results (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not present the optimal results of a well-prepared and well-delivered performance appraisal.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate presents the optimal results, with no detail, of a wellprepared and welldelivered performance appraisal.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate presents the optimal results, with limited detail, of a wellprepared and welldelivered performance appraisal.

(3) Competent
The candidate presents the optimal results, with adequate detail, of a well-prepared and welldelivered performance appraisal.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate presents the optimal results, with substantial detail, of a well-prepared and welldelivered performance appraisal.

Criterion Score: 3.00 A2. Preappraisal Activities (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide an appropriate recommendation of preappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are beneficial to the

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with no support, of preappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are beneficial to the

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with limited support, of preappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are

(3) Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with adequate support, of preappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with substantial support, of preappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are

beneficial to the employee and the company.

are beneficial to the employee and the company.

processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

Criterion Score: 1.00 Comments on this criterion: The submission provides a good discussion on the importance of knowing what to measure before staring a performance appraisal. However, additional activities should be discussed to ensure that the performance appraisal processes are beneficial to the employee and the company. Please add additional support for the recommendation provided. A3. Postappraisal Activities (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide an appropriate recommendation of postappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with no support, of postappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with limited support, of postappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with adequate support, of postappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with substantial support, of postappraisal activities that ensure there are performance appraisal processes that are beneficial to the employee and the company.

Criterion Score: 3.00 A4. Feedback (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not illustrate what can go wrong when giving feedback.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate illustrates, with no detail, what can go wrong when giving feedback.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate illustrates, with limited detail, what can go wrong when giving feedback.

(3) Competent
The candidate illustrates, with adequate detail, what can go wrong when giving feedback.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate illustrates, with substantial detail, what can go wrong when giving feedback.

Criterion Score: 4.00 Comments on this criterion: The submission provides a good illustration of what can go wrong when giving feedback. Nice work! A5. Managerial Steps (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of steps that a manager might take when delivering a performance appraisal for optimal value.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of steps that a manager might take when delivering a performance appraisal for optimal value.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of steps that a manager might take when delivering a performance appraisal for optimal value.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of steps that a manager might take when delivering a performance appraisal for optimal value.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of steps that a manager might take when delivering a performance appraisal for optimal value.

Criterion Score: 4.00 A6. Company Benefits (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the benefits to the company of working with employees to further their career goals.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the benefits to the company of working with employees to further their career goals.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the benefits to the company of working with employees to further their career goals.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the benefits to the company of working with employees to further their career goals.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the benefits to the company of working with employees to further their career goals.

Criterion Score: 3.00 B1. Team Performance (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide a logical summary of research on effectively assessing team performance.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides a logical summary, with no detail, of research on effectively assessing team performance.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides a logical summary, with limited detail, of research on effectively assessing team performance.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides a logical summary, with adequate detail, of research on effectively assessing team performance.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides a logical summary, with substantial detail, of research on effectively assessing team performance.

Criterion Score: 3.00 B2. Strategy (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide an appropriate recommendation of a strategy for the company to adopt to assess team performance.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with no support, of a strategy for the company to adopt to assess team performance.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with limited support, of a strategy for the company to adopt to assess team performance.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with adequate support, of a strategy for the company to adopt to assess team performance.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with substantial support, of a strategy for the company to adopt to assess team performance.

Criterion Score: 4.00 B3. Performance Differences (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not illustrate the differences between evaluating team performance and individual performance.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate illustrates, with no detail, the differences between evaluating team performance and individual performance.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate illustrates, with limited detail, the differences between evaluating team performance and individual performance.

(3) Competent
The candidate illustrates, with adequate detail, the differences between evaluating team performance and individual performance.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate illustrates, with substantial detail, the differences between evaluating team performance and individual performance.

Criterion Score: 4.00 Comments on this criterion: An outstanding illustration has been provided identifying the differences between evaluating team performance and individual performance. C1. Succession Planning (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not present reasons for adopting succession planning.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate presents, with no detail, reasons for adopting succession planning.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate presents, with limited detail, reasons for adopting succession planning.

(3) Competent
The candidate presents, with adequate detail, reasons for adopting succession planning.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate presents, with substantial detail, reasons for adopting succession planning.

Criterion Score: 3.00 C2. Company Use (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how succession planning can be used by the given company.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of how succession planning can be used by the given company.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of how succession planning can be used by the given company.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of how succession planning can be used by the given company.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of how succession planning can be used by the given company.

Criterion Score: 3.00

Criterion Score: 3.00 C3. Organization Use (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not illustrate a succession planning process for the company.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate illustrates, with no detail, a succession planning process for the company.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate illustrates, with limited detail, a succession planning process for the company.

(3) Competent
The candidate illustrates, with adequate detail, a succession planning process for the company.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate illustrates, with substantial detail, a succession planning process for the company.

Criterion Score: 4.00 D1. Conclusion (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not present a conclusion reiterating key points.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate presents, with no detail, a conclusion reiterating key points.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate presents, with limited detail, a conclusion reiterating key points.

(3) Competent
The candidate presents, with adequate detail, a conclusion reiterating key points.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate presents, with substantial detail, a conclusion reiterating key points.

Criterion Score: 3.00 D2. Next Steps (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not provide an appropriate recommendation of steps the CEO and board of directors should take to implement the key points covered in the presentation.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with no detail, of steps the CEO and board of directors should take to implement the key points covered in the presentation.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with limited detail, of steps the CEO and board of directors should take to implement the key points covered in the presentation.

(3) Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with adequate detail, of steps the CEO and board of directors should take to implement the key points covered in the presentation.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides an appropriate recommendation, with substantial detail, of steps the CEO and board of directors should take to implement the key points covered in the presentation.

Criterion Score: 2.00 Comments on this criterion: The presentation provides a general recommendation for administering regular performance appraisals, establishing a team assessments model, and for implementing succession planning. However, the CEO and board of directors' role in the recommendation is unclear. Please add additional details to explain the steps the CEO and board of directors should take to implement the key points covered in the presentation. E. Presenter Notes (0) Unsatisfactory
The candidate does not include relevant presenter notes for each slide.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
The candidate includes relevant presenter notes, with no detail, for each slide.

(2) Minimally Competent
The candidate includes relevant presenter notes with, limited detail, for each slide.

(3) Competent
The candidate includes relevant presenter notes, with adequate detail, for each slide.

(4) Highly Competent
The candidate includes relevant presenter notes, with substantial detail, for each slide.

Criterion Score: 3.00 F. Sources (0) Unsatisfactory
If the candidate uses sources, the candidate does not provide in-text citations and/or references.

(1) Does Not Meet Standard
If the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides only some intext citations and/or references.

(2) Minimally Competent
If the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate intext citations and/or references with major deviations from APA style.

(3) Competent
If the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate intext citations and/or references with minor deviations from APA style.

(4) Highly Competent
If the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate intext citations and/or references with no readily detectable deviations from APA style, OR the candidate does not use

candidate does not use sources.

Criterion Score: 4.00 Comments on this criterion: A references list and corresponding in-text citations have been provided for the outside sources used.