Appendix B
TIMS2302 – A2 rubric – analytical thinking for debate arguments – across each topic presented*
(* each student creates 1 resource & moderates 3 others on the RiPPLE platform to earn up to 6 marks per topic | across all 5 topics)
| Criterion | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Insight
(LO1) 2 marks |
Clearly articulates and justifies the insightful value gained from the observed debate linking to digital innovation impacts. | Clearly articulates the insightful value gained from the observed debate with links to broader digital innovation contexts. | Clearly articulates the relevant value gained from the observed debate and applications to digital innovations. | Articulates the relevant value gained from the observed debate for digital innovations. | Articulates obvious or superficial value gained from the observed debate with limited links to broader digital innovations. | Unclearly articulates irrelevant or inaccurate value gained from the observed debate. | Simple observation with insight missing. | Not attempted. |
| Analysis
(LO2) 2 marks |
Critically evaluates debate arguments by assessing evidence quality, identifying logical reasoning, and examining counter-arguments. Analyses effectiveness of supporting examples and real-world applications presented. | Systematically assesses debate arguments’ credibility through evaluation of evidence and reasoning. Identifies strengths and limitations in presented examples | Evaluates main arguments presented, considering evidence quality and logical connections. Recognizes key strengths and weaknesses | Identifies main arguments and assesses basic evidence presented. Limited evaluation of argument strength. | Lists arguments with minimal assessment of evidence quality or reasoning. | Superficially describes arguments without evaluating their merit. | Arguments identified incorrectly or without analysis. | Not attempted. |
| Communication
(LO4) 2 marks |
Articulates compelling and constructive pathways for improving the debated arguments. | Articulates constructive pathways for improving the debated arguments. | Articulates actionable pathways for improving the debated arguments. | Articulates appropriate pathways for improving the debated arguments. | Offers obvious pathways for improving the debated arguments. | Offers superficial pathways for improving the debated arguments. | Constructive contribution missing. | Not attempted. |
