Sample Excel marking sheet.xlsx

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	L	M	N	P	Q	Y	Z	AA	AB	AD
1	Assessment 3: Online Presentation Marking Rubric (weighting 25%)										25.00			Change data in coloured cells only			Copy this out to your marking sheet			Sum double-check
2		Student Name:	#VALUE!								Manually adjust section mark below			14	Change COUNTA formula range		17.10	2.70	2.70	22.50
3	Student ID:		#ERROR!								Manually adjust section mark below				1.00	Replace section mark here
4											Manual						Instructions for use:
5		Section		Marking Criteria	A	B	C	D	E	Mark	Adjust		Div/Mark	Criteria #	Section Mark		Right click on the home tab, and copy a sheet for each student
6		Critically analyse professional standards, CoE, professionalism & supervision (LO4)		Demonstrates clear understanding of ethical issues	X					17.10			1.22	14	19.00		Rename tab with student's name (this will get picked up in the Student Name field)
7				A number of issues identified	X								1.22	14	19.00		Put an 'X' in the intersection of each criteria and grade. The sheet will automatically calculate the section mark
8				Client-centred approach taken	X								1.22	14	19.00		If the student has not completed something, leave the row blank. Do NOT put an 'X' in the intersection of each criteria and grade.
9				Thoughtful consideration of other parties	X								1.22	14	19.00		If you feel the overall section mark is a little low or high, manually add or subtract in the 'Manual Adjust' column
10				Logical explanation of relevant issues	X								1.22	14	19.00		Check that the overall total aligns with the quality of the student work
11		Mark		Clear development of argument	X								1.22	14	19.00		Add comments about what can be improved in the blank area below the mark total.
12		x/19		Evidence used clearly related to argument	X								1.22	14	19.00		Print to pdf. The print area is already set.
13				Appropriate links to codes of ethics	X								1.22	14	19.00	0.90	Name "003 BDC602 Online Presentation - Student Name"
14				Appropriate links to theory	X								1.22	14	19.00		Upload to Moodle when loading the grade.
15				Literature clearly explored	X								1.22	14	19.00
16				A range of options/actions suggested	X								1.22	14	19.00
17				Ideas present a clear view of expert opinion	X								1.22	14	19.00
18				Approach taken reflects NZ/Aotearoa context	X								1.22	14	19.00
19				Logical conclusion to position taken.	X								1.22	14	19.00		Comments Bank
20		Presentation		Presenter was clearly spoken	X					2.70			0.45	6	3.00		This is a superb piece of analysis and evaluation. Clear. Good pace, volume, and well-practiced. Well done. Good quality research. Sound cultural awareness. Lovely touches using a reflective framework, and the Whanau based model. Minor improvements: A few errors in the script (punctuation mainly, but also "et al.," format). Under-cited at times (slide 8). Anderson was 1996, not 1991, and needed a DOI. Other issues: use Crocket et al.'s principle of kindness for the whanau; start sessions outlining consent; was one support person enough for cultural safety; did Sarah feel safe; was there in-school induction, support & training for Sarah; finding and exploring the CATE COE; duty of CDANZ members to report ethical breaches.
21		x/3		Good volume and suitable pace of delivery	X								0.45	6	3.00		Fair reasoning and assumptions, and a range of issues identified. Fair quality resources, and sound process outlined. Improvements: Some other issues were - use Crocket et al.'s principle of kindness for the whanau; to start sessions outlining consent; check with the SLT/counsellor re court orders; professional supervisor; was one support person enough for cultural safety; did Sarah feel safe; provide career materials to Mike; the school being predominantly Pākehā so MAY not fully appreciate the Pasifika relational approach; was there in-school induction, support & training for Sarah; finding and exploring the CATE COE; the duty of a CDANZ member to report ethical breaches.
22				Clear structure	X								0.45	6	3.00		Novel to deliver this as a seminar: I like it! Sound analysis and evaluation, great spotting the CDANZ ethical breaches and COE research. Clearly presented with good pace, volume, and well-practiced. Well done. Improvements: cultural awareness light. Lacked time for some other issues: use Crocket et al.'s principle of kindness for the whanau; start sessions outlining consent; professional supervisor; provide career materials to Mike; school predominantly Pākehā so MAY not fully appreciate the culturally relational approach; was one support person enough for cultural safety; did Sarah feel safe; was there in-school induction, support & training for Sarah; finding and exploring the CATE COE. FYI, the CDANZ Pataka is from Velasquez et al., 2009. A few script errors (e.g. missing punctuation); under-cited slides 5-7. Needed summary parenthetical citations/slide.
23				Well organised	X								0.45	6	3.00	0.90	Good reasoning, and excellent identification of a broad range of issues: well done! Good use of Anderson (1996). Clearly presented and well-practiced. Well done. Good to begin sessions outlining consent. Improvements: Would have liked another career COE to be explored. Other issues: use Crocket et al.'s principle of kindness for the whanau; provide career materials to Mike; school predominantly Pākehā so MAY not fully appreciate the culturally relational approach; was one support person enough for cultural safety; did Sarah feel safe (you touched on this, but not explicit); was there in-school induction, support & training for Sarah (not only the Teaching Council); finding and exploring the CATE COE; duty of CDANZ members to report ethical breaches.
24				Evidence of good rehearsal	X								0.45	6	3.00
25				Good time management (on time at 15 minutes)	X								0.45	6	3.00
26		Academic Quality		Slides are clearly written	X					2.70			0.30	9	3.00
27		x/3		Fewer than 40 words/slide	X								0.30	9	3.00
28				Slides are free of errors (e.g. spelling, grammar errors)	X								0.30	9	3.00
29				Script is free of errors	X								0.30	9	3.00
30				Literature is sought beyond course materials	X								0.30	9	3.00	0.90
31				APA 7 ed. in text referencing used competently	X								0.30	9	3.00
32				In text referencing happens consistently	X								0.30	9	3.00
33				APA 7 ed. referencing used competently	X								0.30	9	3.00
34				All sources are in the reference list.	X								0.30	9	3.00
35				Similarity score (0% if no penalty; if over 15%, penalty applies)				0%		0.00		Manually enter the Similarity score percentage here
36				Late penalty (10%/day up to 5 days)				0%		0.00		Manually enter the % days late here
37				TOTAL MARKS				(90%)		22.50	22.50	Sum without similarity score penalty
38
39											Paste comments in this box to the left
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100