The document outlines a rubric for evaluating undergraduate assignments at levels 1 to 4, focusing on criteria such as focus/thesis, content knowledge, critical thinking, organization, writing conventions, and the use of technology. It provides detailed descriptions of what constitutes exemplary to beginning levels of performance across these criteria. Additionally, the document includes a specific case study related to the Fauquier Gas Company, highlighting the challenges faced in procuring materials for a new gas line installation.

1. APUS Assignment
Rubric
Undergraduate Level
300-400
EXEMPLARY
LEVEL
4
ACCOMPLISHED
LEVEL
3
DEVELOPING
LEVEL
2
BEGINNNIG
LEVEL
1
TOTAL
POINTS

2. FOCUS/THESIS Student exhibits a defined
and clear understanding of
the assignment. Thesis is
clearly defined and well
constructed to help guide
the reader throughout the
assignment. Student builds
upon the thesis of the
assignment with well-
documented and
exceptional supporting
facts, figures, and/or
statements.
Establishes a good
comprehension of topic
and in the building of the
thesis. Student
demonstrates an effective
presentation of thesis, with
most support statements
helping to support the key
focus of assignment.
Student exhibits a basic
understanding of the
intended assignment, but
the thesis is not fully
supported throughout the
assignment. While thesis
helps to guide the
development of the
assignment, the reader
may have some difficulty in
seeing linkages between

3. thoughts. While student
has included a few
supporting facts and
statements, this has
limited the quality of the
assignment.
Exhibits a limited
understanding of the
assignment. Reader is
unable to follow the logic
used for the thesis and
development of key
themes. Introduction of
thesis is not clearly
evident, and reader must
look deeper to discover
the focus of the writer.
Student’s writing is weak
in the inclusion of
supporting facts or
statements.
CONTENT/SUBJECT
KNOWLEDGE
Student demonstrates
proficient command of the
subject matter in the
assignment. Assignment
shows an impressive level
of depth of student’s ability
to relate course content to
practical examples and
applications. Student

4. provides comprehensive
analysis of details, facts,
and concepts in a logical
sequence.
Student exhibits above
average usage of subject
matter in assignment.
Student provides above
average ability in relating
course content in
examples given. Details
and facts presented
provide an adequate
presentation of student’s
current level of subject
matter knowledge.
The assignment reveals
that the student has a
general, fundamental
understanding of the
course material. Whereas,
there are areas of some
concerning in the linkages
provided between facts
and supporting
statements. Student
generally explains
concepts, but only meets
the minimum requirements
in this area.
Student tries to explain
some concepts, but
overlooks critical details.

5. Assignment appears
vague or incomplete in
various segments.
Student presents
concepts in isolation,
and does not perceive to
have a logical
sequencing of ideas.
CRITICAL THINKING
SKILLS
Student demonstrates a
higher-level of critical
thinking necessary for 300-
400 level work. Learner
provides a strategic
Student exhibits a good
command of critical
thinking skills in the
presentation of material
and supporting
Student takes a common,
conventional approach in
guiding the reader through
various linkages and
connections presented in
Student demonstrates
beginning understanding
of key concepts, but
overlooks critical details.
Learner is unable to

6. approach in presenting
examples of problem
solving or critical thinking,
while drawing logical
conclusions which are not
immediately obvious.
Student provides well-
supported ideas and
reflection with a variety of
current and/or world views
in the assignment. Student
presents a genuine
intellectual development of
ideas throughout
assignment.
statements. Assignment
demonstrates the
student’s above average
use of relating concepts by
using a variety of factors.
Overall, student provides
adequate conclusions,
with 2 or fewer errors.
assignment. However,
student presents a limited
perspective on key
concepts throughout
assignment. Student
appears to have problems

7. applying information in a
problem-solving manner.
apply information in a
problem-solving fashion.
Student presents
confusing statements
and facts in assignment.
No evidence or little
semblance of critical
thinking skills.
ORGANIZATION OF
IDEAS/FORMAT
Student thoroughly
understands and excels in
explaining all major points.
An original, unique, and/or
imaginative approach to
overall ideas, concepts,
and findings is presented.
Overall format of
assignment includes an
appropriate introduction (or
abstract), well- developed
paragraphs, and
conclusion. Finished
assignment demonstrates
student’s ability to plan and
organize research in a
logical sequence. Student
uses at least of 5-7
references in assignment.
Student explains the

8. majority of points and
concepts in the
assignment. Learner
demonstrates a good skill
level in formatting and
organizing material in
assignment. Student
presents an above
average level of
preparedness, with a few
formatting errors.
Assignment contains less
than 5 resources.
Learner applies some
points and concepts
incorrectly. Student uses
a variety of formatting
styles, with some
inconsistencies throughout
the paper. Assignment
does not have a
continuous pattern of
logical sequencing.
Student uses less than 3
sources or references.
Assignment reveals
formatting errors and a
lack of organization.
Student presents an
incomplete attempt to
provide linkages or
explanation of key
terms. The lack of
appropriate references

9. or source materials
demonstrates the
student’s need for
additional help or
training in this area.
Student needs to review
and revise the
assignment.
WRITING
CONVENTIONS
(GRAMMAR &
MECHANICS)
Student demonstrates an
excellent command of
grammar, as well as
presents research in a clear
and concise writing style.
Presents a thorough,
Student provides an
effective display of good
writing and grammar.
Assignment reflects
student’s ability to select
appropriate word usage
Assignment reflects basic
writing and grammar, but
more than 5 errors. Key
terms and concepts are
somewhat vague and not
completely explained by

10. Topics, concepts, and
ideas are not coherently
discussed or expressed
in assignments.
Student’s writing style is
weak and needs
extensive understanding of
word usage. Student
excels in the selection and
development of a well-
planned research
assignment. Assignment is
error-free and reflects
student’s ability to prepare
a high-quality academic
assignment.
and present an above
average presentation of a
given topic or issue.
Assignment appears to be
well written with no more
than 3-5 errors. Student
provides a final written
product that covers the
above-minimal
requirements.
student. Student uses a
basic vocabulary in
assignment. Student’s

11. writing ability is average,
but demonstrates a basic
understanding of the
subject matter.
improvement, along with
numerous proofreading
errors. Assignment
lacks clarity,
consistency, and
correctness. Student
needs to review and
revise assignment.
USE OF COMPUTER
TECHNOLOGY/
APPLICATIONS
Student provides a high-
caliber, formatted
assignment. Learner
exhibits excellent use of
computer technology in the
development of
assignment. Quality and
appropriateness of stated
references demonstrate the
student’s ability to use
technology to conduct
applicable research. Given
assignment includes
appropriate word
processing, spreadsheet
and/or other computer
applications as part of the
final product.

12. Assignment presents an
above-average use of
formatting skills, with less
than 3 errors. Students
has a good command of
computer applications to
format information and/or
figures in an appropriate
format. Student uses at
least two types of
computer applications to
produce a quality
assignment.
Student demonstrates a
basic knowledge of
computer applications.
Appearance of final
assignment demonstrates
the student’s limited ability
to format and present data.
Resources used in
assignment are limited.
Student may need to
obtain further help in the
use of computer
applications and Internet
research.
Student needs to
develop better formatting
skills. The student may
need to take additional
training or obtain help
from the Educator Help

13. Desk while preparing an
assignment. Research
and resources presented
in the assignment are
limited. Student needs
to expand research
scope. The number of
formatting errors is not
acceptable.
TOTAL POINTS
OUTLINE FOR CASE ANALYSIS
Title Page (APA formatted)
Case Name:
I. Major Facts
(State here the major facts as you see them. Make statements
clear and concise for your
own understanding as well as for the understanding of the other
students and the
instructor.)
II. Major Problem

14. (State here the major problem as you see it. Emphasize the
present major problem. You
may wish to phrase your statement in the form of a question. In
a few cases, there may be
more than one major problem. A good problem statement will
be concise, usually only
one sentence.)
III. Possible
Solution
s
A. (List here the possible solutions to the major problem. Let
your imagination
come up with alternative ways to solve the problem.
B. Do not limit yourself to only one or two possible solutions.
These solutions
should be distinct from each other.

15. C. However, you may wish to include portions of one solution
in another solution,
as long as each solution stands alone. Only in this manner will
your subsequent
choice be definitive.
D. Briefly note advantages and disadvantages of each possible
solution.)
etc.
IV. Choice and Rationale
(State here your choice, A or B or ___ and the detailed reasons
for your choice. You may
also state your reasons for not choosing the other alterative
solutions.)
V. Implementation
(Prepare a plan to implement your choice)

16. Appendix (Answer case study questions)
Reference Page (APA formatted)
FAUQUIER GAS COMPANY
On April 14, Mr. Bill Murphy, manager of supply management
for the Fauquier Gas Company in
the Carolinas, was concerned about being able to find a supplier
who could deliver 3 1/2 miles of
large-diameter pipe for a new residential and commercial
development.
Company Background
Fauquier Gas Company, as one of the nation’s 440 gas
companies, served an area where

17. land use was changing from agricultural to residential and
commercial. To meet the increased
demand for gas resulting from this conversion, 3 1/2 miles of
new gas lines had to be ready for
customer hookup by September. An additional 10 miles of new
gas lines were planned for the
next year.
The Supply Management Area
Mr. Murphy, as the manager of supply management, was
responsible for the purchases of
materials used in gas distribution such as pipe, meters, fittings,
etc. Other major areas included
the procurement of furniture, systems and forms, stores
management, and materials forecasting
and control. The supply organization was under the management
control of the vice-president for
operations.
The Specification Decision
In January, Mr. Murphy was having lunch in the company
cafeteria when he heard Mr.

18. Clive Byers, the construction project manager, talking about a
new project. Fauquier Gas
Company was going to add 3 1/2 miles of new gas lines and
would start construction in June in
order to “gas the line” that September. Murphy asked Byers for
the purchase request so he could
immediately contact suppliers (mills) and get quotations on
prices and deliveries. Murphy knew
from experience that the mills’ schedules for pipe production
required a substantial lead time. He
was concerned that the mills would not be able to accommodate
Fauquier’s schedule. Byers told
him that the purchase request would be sent over as soon as Pat
Wilson, the design engineer,
completed the pipe specification and Sam Law, the construction
project engineer, approved it.
Mr. Charlie Buck, the design superintendent, headed the design
organization. Both the
design and construction organizations were under the
management control of the vice president of
operations.
Mr. Murphy called Pat Wilson and asked about the pipe
specification. Wilson told him

19. that the diameter of the pipe would be 24 inches with a wall
thickness of 3/4 inches and that the
length would be 57 feet. In prior purchases, the wall thickness
was 3/8 inches and the length was
“random double normal” (40 feet plus or minus 5 feet). When
Mr. Murphy inquired about the
change in wall thickness and length, Wilson replied that the
operation of the line would be
governed by less stringent specifications if the wall thickness
was 3/4 inches. Wilson said using
57-foot-length pipe would reduce welding costs.
When asked which wrapper would be applied to the pipe,
Wilson said that he had not yet
gotten to that part of the specification. In past purchases,
Fauquier had used two types of
wrappers—coal tar and pry-tech. The mill supplying the pipe
would apply the wrapper. The
company that applied the coal tar wrapper was located in
Philadelphia and the one applying pry-
tech wrapper was in Atlanta.
Mr. Murphy was concerned about the economic consequences
and the schedule impact of
the proposed changes in wall thickness and length of the pipe.

20. At lunchtime on April 14, he had
not yet received the purchase request with the pipe
specification.
1. What are the key facts?
2. What is the problem?
3. List and discuss three alternative solutions.
4. What is your recommended solution?
Adapted from a case copyrighted by the Institute for Supply
Management (formerly the National
Association of Purchasing Management) and the School of
Government and Business
Administration, George Washington University. Reprinted by
permission. Joseph Hood wrote
this case during one of the ISM-sponsored case writing

21. workshops.