Introduction to entrepreneurship/IENT101/Assessment/IENT101 Rubric

Weighting table

Each task contributes to the calculation of the final grade according to the following proportional weightings.

Task	Weighting
Task 1:Define entrepreneurship and identify typical characteristics of successful entrepreneurs.	25%
Task 2: Apply techniques to generate new business ideas.	15%
Task 3: Conduct a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis of your own business idea for a new product or service.	25%
Task 4: Identify other market analysis techniques and due diligence assessment processes appropriate for a start-up business	35%
Total	100%

Total marks: 25
This task is divided into three sections:

Section 1: Definition of entrepreneurship	Marks
The applicant has provided an accurate and in-depth definition of entrepreneurship.	4 - 5
The applicant has provided a clear definition of entrepreneurship.	3
The applicant has provided a general definition of entrepreneurship.	2
The applicant has not correctly defined (or has not adequately defined) entrepreneurship.	0 - 1 (Not achieved)

Section 2: Description of characteristics of successful entrepreneurs	Marks
The applicant has provided a reflective description of three characteristics of successful entrepreneurs, and provided thoughtful examples. Three or more appropriate references and in-text citations with no errors in APA style.	9 - 10
The applicant has provided a clear description of three characteristics of successful entrepreneurs, and provided relevant examples. One or more appropriate references listed in the bibliography with no errors in APA style.	7 - 8
The applicant has provided an adequate description of three characteristics of successful entrepreneurs, and provided relevant examples. One reference listed in the bibliography (one or two minor errors in APA style are permissible).	5 - 6
The applicant has not provided an adequate description of three characteristics of successful entrepreneurs and/or has not provided appropriate examples.	0 - 4 (Not achieved)

Section 3: Application of learning through personal reflection	Marks
The applicant has reflected critically on their own aptitude for successful entrepreneurship by evaluating their own characteristics, and providing a clear, coherent conclusion.	9 - 10
The applicant has reflected on their own aptitude for successful entrepreneurship by describing their own characteristics, and providing a clear, coherent conclusion.	7 - 8
The applicant has demonstrated the ability to reflect, at a basic level, on their own aptitude for successful entrepreneurship, by describing some of their own characteristics, and providing an adequate conclusion.	5 - 6
The applicant has not reflected on their own aptitude for successful entrepreneurship or on their own characteristics. There is insufficient evidence of learning.	0 - 4 (Not achieved)

Total marks: 15
This task has one section:

Description of techniques applied to generate new business idea(s)	Marks
The applicant has provided a well-structured outline of a business idea, with an in-depth description of relevant techniques used to generate this idea, including justifications for the relevance of techniques used.	13 - 15
The applicant has provided a clear outline of a business idea, with a detailed description of a variety of techniques used to generate this idea.	10 - 12
The applicant has provided an outline of a business idea, with a general description of a few techniques used to generate this idea.	7 - 9
The applicant has not provided an adequate outline of a business idea and/or an adequate description of techniques used to generate this idea.	0 - 6 (Not achieved)

Total marks: 25
This task has one section:

SWOT analysis	Marks
The applicant’s SWOT analysis shows evidence of critical reflection (with at least three items under each heading, and no errors of categorisation). An insightful explanation is provided for the inclusion of different items in the analysis.	23 - 25
The applicant’s SWOT analysis clearly identifies items (at least three items under each heading with no errors of categorisation). A clear explanation is provided for the inclusion of different items in the analysis.	18 - 22
The applicant has completed a basic SWOT analysis (including at least three items under each heading), but there are some errors in item categorisation (no more than two errors). A limited explanation is provided for the inclusion of different items in the analysis.	13 - 17
The applicant has not, or has not correctly, completed a SWOT analysis with at least three items under each heading. There is no explanation (or no adequate explanation) for the inclusion of different items in the analysis	0 - 12 (Not achieved)

Total marks: 35
This task is divided into two sections:

Section 1: Selection of appropriate market analysis techniques	Marks
The applicant has reflected critically on appropriate market analysis techniques for their own business idea, and has provided a clear, coherent rationale for their choices.	15 - 18
The applicant has described appropriate market analysis techniques for their own business idea, and has provided a clear rationale for these.	12 - 14
The applicant has listed a limited range of appropriate market analysis techniques for their own business idea, and has provided a basic rationale for these.	9 - 11
The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence of learning.	0 - 8 (Not achieved)

Section 2: Identification of due-diligence assessment processes	Marks
The applicant has reflected critically on at least five questions that a potential investor is likely to ask during a due-diligence assessment, and has provided a clear, coherent rationale for their selection. They have included a well-explained outline of appropriate evidence to present to a potential investor.	15 - 17
The applicant has described at least five questions that a potential investor is likely to ask during a due-diligence assessment, and has provided a clear rationale for their selection. They have included an outline of appropriate evidence to present to a potential investor.	12 - 14
The applicant has listed at least five questions that a potential investor is likely to ask during a due-diligence assessment, and has provided a basic rationale for their selection. They have included a basic outline of appropriate evidence to present to a potential investor.	9 - 11
The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence of learning.	0 - 8 (Not achieved)