15.0 pts Additional Comments This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Writing Mechanics 10.0 pts Exemplary Posts are well-organized, clearly and concisely written. The posts are easy to read and free of spelling and grammatical errors. Sources are present and cited correctly. 8.0 pts Satisfactory Posts are written clearly with only minor errors in organization, spelling, and grammar. The post has clarity, and the main point is easy to identify. Sources are cited correctly if present. 6.0 pts Minimally Responsive Posts contain some obvious errors in spelling, grammar, and organization. Errors make the main idea unclear and distract from the content of the post. Sources cited incorrectly if present. 0.0 pts Unacceptable Posts are disorganized, lack clarity, and contain frequent and glaring spelling and grammatical errors, which make understanding the post difficult; or no posts submitted. 10.0 pts Additional Comments

15.0 pts Exemplary Response post thoroughly responds to all aspects of the discussion topic/initial post, and incorporates multiple perspectives, ideas, or concepts. 12.0 pts Satisfactory Response post is relevant and responds completely to the discussion topic/initial post. 6.0 pts Minimally Responsive Response post is related to the discussion topic, but focuses on only a small part of the topic/initial post. 0.0 pts Unacceptable Response post to other students is off-topic, and not relevant to the initial post, or no post is submitted.

30.0 pts Additional Comments This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Substance of Responses/ Contribution to Discussion 15.0 pts Exemplary Responses are substantive, introduce new ideas and advance the discussion by incorporating course materials and concepts or through application to real-world contexts, and provide feedback on operational decisions. 12.0 pts Satisfactory Responses elaborate on others' ideas by adding substantive observations and comments or posing questions, and provide feedback on operational decisions. 6.0 pts Minimally Responsive Responses mostly summarize or rehash the comments of others, and are not substantive, or do not provide clear feedback on the topic. 0.0 pts Unacceptable Responses to other students' posts rely entirely on short statements like "I agree with.", "I like it", or "Great idea"; or no response posts are submitted. Responses do not clear feedback.

15.0 pts Additional Comments This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Next Steps and Informing Customers Task 1b, c 30.0 pts Exemplary The proposed next steps are thoroughly laid out, and are relevant and specific to the organization. The decision to inform the customers is supported with clear, thorough, appropriate, and evidence-based explanations and justifications 24.0 pts Satisfactory The proposed next steps are clearly laid out, and are relevant and specific to the organization, but key elements may be missing. The decision to inform the customers is supported with appropriate evidence-based explanations, with some major details missing. 18.0 pts Minimally Responsive The proposed next steps are provided but are not appropriate to the organization. The decision to inform the customers is vaguely supported, with inaccurate justifications that are not necessarily relevant. 0.0 pts Unacceptable No proposed next steps or the decision to inform the customers are provided.

15.0 pts Exemplary A graph of the distribution and tolerance is used where appropriate and most effective at conveying meaning. Only important and necessary information is included, and is presented in an interesting and creative way that is easy to follow and interpret. 12.0 pts Satisfactory A graph of the distribution and tolerance is used where appropriate. Only important and necessary information is included and is easy to follow and interpret. 6.0 pts Minimally Responsive A graph of the distribution and tolerance is used where appropriate. Only important and necessary information is included, but is presented in ways that lack clarity. Reorganization of information may make it easier to follow and interpret. 0.0 pts Unacceptable A graph of distribution and tolerance is used but not necessarily appropriately, and is confusing and overwhelming.

12.0 pts Satisfactory The year the widget machine will no longer meet specifications is generally discussed; however, explanation of how it was determined is analyzed critically using multiple perspectives. Claims are supported with evidence and reasons, but minor details may be missing. 6.0 pts Minimally Responsive The year the widget machine will no longer meet specifications and the explanation of how it was determined is generically discussed, providing summaries instead of critical analyses of perspectives. Minimal to no evidence is provided to support claims. 0.0 pts Unacceptable The year the widget machine will no longer meet specifications and the explanation of how it was determined is not discussed, or if they are, they are vague, inappropriate, and inaccurate. 15.0 pts Additional Comments This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Distribution and Tolerance Graph Task 1a

You know that Wild Widgets customers are becoming increasingly more demanding (tighter specifications). It is time to analyze the data for this year (located in the Excel Data FilePreview the document [XLSX, file size 32.3 KB]) and make some operational decisions. I attached the file in the Attach File space provided All discussions combined are worth 24% of your final course grade. M6D1 Rubric M6D1 Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Meeting Specifications Task 1a 15.0 pts Exemplary The year the widget machine will no longer meet specifications is analyzed critically using multiple perspectives, discussing in detail and the explanation of how it was determined is analyzed critically using multiple perspectives. Supporting details and evidence to justify claims are relevant, accurate, and specific to the claims.