bank-solutions-disaster-recovery-and-business-continuity

Clearly describes and introduces the paper. Provides clear background information and facts to support the paper.

Basically describes and introduces the paper. Basically provides background information and facts to support the paper.

Weakly describes and introduces the paper. Some background information and facts provided to support the paper.

Little description or introduction of the paper. Lacks background information and facts to support the paper. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

No description and doesn’t introduce the paper. No background information or facts to support the paper.

Clearly summarizes the main points from the paper. These include the capabilities, costs, maintenance requirements, flexibility and feasibility for implementation.

Basically summarizes the main points from the paper. These include the capabilities, costs, maintenance requirements, flexibility and feasibility for implementation.

Weakly summarizes the main points from the paper. These include the capabilities, costs, maintenance requirements, flexibility and feasibility for implementation.

Little summery of the main points from the paper. May include the capabilities, costs, maintenance requirements, flexibility or feasibility for implementation. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

Doesn’t summarize the main points from the paper. Doesn’t include the capabilities, costs, maintenance requirements, flexibility or feasibility for implementation.

Clearly explains the capabilities of the technology.

Basically explains the capabilities of the technology.

Weakly explains the capabilities of the technology.

Little explanation of the capabilities of the technology. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

No explanation on the capabilities of the technology.

Clearly explains the costs involved with the technology.

Basically explains the costs involved with the technology.

Weakly explains the costs involved with the technology.

Little explanation on the costs involved with the technology. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

No explanation on the costs involved with the technology.

Clearly explains the maintenance requirements of the new technology.

Basically explains the maintenance requirements of the new technology.

Weakly explains the maintenance requirements of the new technology.

Little explanation on the maintenance requirements of the new technology. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

No explanation on the maintenance requirements of the new technology.

Clearly explains the flexibility of the technology.

Basically explains the flexibility of the technology.

Weakly explains the flexibility of the technology.

Little explanation on the flexibility of the technology. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

No explanation on the flexibility of the technology.

Clearly explains the feasibility of implementing the technology.

Basically explains the feasibility of implementing the technology.

Weakly explains the feasibility of implementing the technology.

Little explanation on the feasibility of implementing the technology. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

No explanation of feasibility in implementing the technology.

Clearly explains the pros and cons, barriers, issues, vulnerabilities, first adopters (if technology is new), etc. Must cover at least 5 areas.

Basically explains the pros and cons, barriers, issues, vulnerabilities, first adopters (if technology is new), etc. Must cover at least 3 areas.

Weakly explains the pros and cons, barriers, issues, vulnerabilities, first adopters (if technology is new), etc. Must cover at least one (1) area.

Little explanation of the pros and cons, barriers, issues, vulnerabilities, first adopters (if technology is new), etc. May cover one (1) of the areas. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)

No explanation of the pros and cons, barriers, issues, vulnerabilities, first adopters (if technology is new), etc.

Used at least 5 authoritative or scholarly sources in paper. One must be NIST SP 800-53. No APA style errors in sources.

Used at least 3 authoritative or scholarly sources in paper. One must be NIST SP 800-53. No more than 1 APA errors in sources.

Used at least 2 authoritative or scholarly sources in paper. One must be NIST SP 800-53. No more than 2 APA errors in sources.

May have used 1 authoritative or scholarly source in paper. May use NIST SP 800-53. May not have used APA style formatting.

No authoritative or scholarly sources used in paper. NIST SP 800-53 not mentioned.

All sources cited. No errors in citing material in paper.

All but 1 source cited. Had no more than 5 citing errors in paper.

All but 2 sources cited. Had no more than 10 citing errors in paper.

All but 3 sources cited. Had less than 15 APA citing errors in paper.

No sources cited or had more than 15 APA citing errors in paper.

Prepared MS Word document, used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

MS Word document didn’t follow up to two (2) of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

MS Word document didn’t follow up to four (4) of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

MS Word document followed only one (1) of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

Non MS Word document didn’t any of the following: used consistent formatting, section subheadings, submitted one file, used instructor provided template, correct coversheet and separate reference page and meets minimum page count.

No grammar, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

Less than 5 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

Less than 10 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

Less than 15 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.

More than 15 grammar errors, use of first/second person, spelling or punctuation errors.