This rubric is in this format for use with generative AI.
1 – 3 Marks (Limited)
There is unlikely to be any appropriate terminology used.
There is no reference to the sources (it is a generic / pre-rehearsed response).
The recommendation may be no more a series of unconnected statements/assertions.
There is no structure in the response. It may be a list.
Possible characteristics: Ineffective, listing, unstructured
4 – 6 marks (Partial/Some)
Identifies and/or defines appropriate terminology.
The response is explicitly linked to the sources.
There is an implicit reference to real-world examples relevant to the pre-release.
Comments / opinions in the recommendation go beyond simple assertions.
Limited evidence of structure. For example, there may be an introduction OR a conclusion.
Possible characteristics: Superficial, descriptive
7 – 9 Marks (Adequate)
Identifies and/or defines appropriate terminology.
The response is explicitly linked to the sources.
There is an explicit reference to real-world examples relevant to the pre-release.
Comments / opinions in the recommendation go beyond simple assertions. Potential weaknesses (trade-offs) in the recommendation may be implicit.
There are implicit references to the 3Cs.
Some evidence of structure. For example, there may be an introduction, some analysis, an attempt at a conclusion.
Possible characteristics: Relevant, analytical, organised
10 – 12 Marks (in-depth)
Terminology relating to the question is used appropriately.
The response is explicitly linked to the sources.
There is an explicit reference to real-world examples relevant to the pre-release.
Any comments / opinions in the recommendation are supported/substantiated. Potential weaknesses (trade-offs) in the recommendation are identified.
Explicit references are made to the 3Cs.
There is a clear structure to the response, for example an introduction, body and conclusion.
Possible characteristics: Insightful, precise, lucid