Academic writing standards: correct grammar and spelling Writes with fluency. Work is accurate and essentially error free in terms of spelling and grammar. Formal language used Work is well written, but with some errors and informal language. Errors in writing compromises readability and understanding. Some use of informal language. Difficult to understand due to high number of errors and irrelevance of material. Use of informal language. 4.5-5 3.5-4 2.5-3 0-2 Presentation: Font size 12, Arial or Times Roman, 1.5 spacing, title page. Word count. Headers/footers All academic requirements adhered to. Most of the presentation requirements adhered to. Document meets some of the requirements. Document does not meet academic prescription.

4.5-5 3.5-4 2.5-3 0-2 Summary Comprehensive summary with high relevance to the introduction and purpose of the question. Good summary – most of the key points covered with good relevance to the introduction and purpose of question. Acceptable summary with some of the key points covered No or little summary evident. Little or no relevance to question

20-25 15-19.5 Subject content: Highly relevant content with Good coverage of content Relevancy Comprehensiveness comprehensive coverage of subject. Highly appropriate level of analysis / review of the topic Relevant information provided. Analysis/argument/ Review 5 qualities discussed with minimum 3 clear reasons and Good level of valid analysis/ review of the topic convincing, supportive Working to achieve 2-3 clear 5 Qualities discussed. examples. reasons. 3 Reasons why each quality makes a 5 correct in-text citations Examples given mostly good hotel manager. 1 example and reference to support Strategic selection of points - no repetition. support the quality identified. each leadership quality discussed. In-text citations mostly correct.

4.5-5 3.5-4 2.5-3 0-2 Summary Comprehensive summary with high relevance to the introduction and purpose of the question. Good summary – most of the key points covered with good relevance to the introduction and purpose of question. Acceptable summary with some of the key points covered No or little summary evident. Little or no relevance to question Question 2 Leadership Qualities 4.5-5 3.5-4 2.5-3 0-2 Introduction to the context, scope and structure of the answer. Introduction comprehensively outlines scope, structure and context. Introduction well written. Outlines both scope and structure. Context explained well. Introduction is brief. Outlines only one of either scope or structure. No acceptable introduction is evident. Too brief. Does not outline scope or structure of answer.

16-20 13-15.5 9.5-12.5 0-9 Subject content: Highly relevant content with Good coverage of content Relevant information provided. Good level of valid analysis/ argument/ review of the topic 3 examples supported with 3 correct in-text citations Content satisfactory although some areas not well covered and/or irrelevant Some valid analysis /argument/ review of the topic Some examples supported with some in-text citations. Not error free. Content poor/inadequate Relevancy comprehensive coverage of subject. Highly appropriate level Some parts not relevant Comprehensiveness of analysis /argument/ review of No or minimal appropriate Analysis/argument/ Review the topic At least 3 examples supported analysis/argument/ review of the topic No/one example/s supported with no/ with 3 correct in-text citations wrong/one in-text citations Examples

Excellent Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Question 1 4.5-5 3.5-4 2.5-3 0-2 Introduction to the context, scope and structure of the answer. Introduction comprehensively outlines scope, structure and context. Introduction well written. Outlines both scope and structure. Context explained well. Introduction is brief. Outlines only one of either scope or structure. No acceptable introduction is evident. Too brief. Does not outline scope or structure of answer.