Select the performance descriptors that you want to include in your printout.

You may wish to change your printer settings to “landscape” mode if you have a rubric with many performance columns.

UNSATISFACTORY / DOES NOT MEET STANDARD / MINIMALLY COMPETENT / COMPETENT / HIGHLY COMPETENT
ARTICULATION OF RESPONSE (CLARITY, ORGANIZATION, MECHANICS) / The candidate provides unsatisfactory articulation of response. / The candidate provides weak articulation of response. / The candidate provides limited articulation of response. / The candidate provides adequate articulation of response. / The candidate provides substantial articulation of response.
A1.LAWS OR REGULATIONS / The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how 2 laws or regulations apply to the case study. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no support, of how 2 laws or regulations apply to the case study. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited support, of how 2 laws or regulations apply to the case study. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate support, of how 2 laws or regulations apply to the case study. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial support, of how 2 laws or regulations apply to the case study.
A1A.LEGAL JURISDICTION / The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how VL Bank will work within the parameters of appropriate legal jurisdiction with specific bodies of law enforcement to resolve the situation. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no support, of how VL Bank will work within the parameters of appropriate legal jurisdiction with specific bodies of law enforcement to resolve the situation. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited support, of how VL Bank will work within the parameters of appropriate legal jurisdiction with specific bodies of law enforcement to resolve the situation. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate support, of how VL Bank will work within the parameters of appropriate legal jurisdiction with specific bodies of law enforcement to resolve the situation. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial support, of how VL Bank will work within the parameters of appropriate legal jurisdiction with specific bodies of law enforcement to resolve the situation.
A1B.LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS / The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of legal considerations for preparing the digital evidence VL Bank will need to provide law enforcement and attorneys. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no support, of legal considerations for preparing the digital evidence VL Bank will need to provide law enforcement and attorneys. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited support, of legal considerations for preparing the digital evidence VL Bank will need to provide law enforcement and attorneys. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate support, of legal considerations for preparing the digital evidence VL Bank will need to provide law enforcement and attorneys. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial support, of legal considerations for preparing the digital evidence VL Bank will need to provide law enforcement and attorneys.
A1C.COORDINATION / The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of what coordination should take place between the CISO and VL Bank’s lawyer. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of what coordination should take place between the CISO and VL Bank’s lawyer. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of what coordination should take place between the CISO and VL Bank’s lawyer. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of what coordination should take place between the CISO and VL Bank’s lawyer. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of what coordination should take place between the CISO and VL Bank’s lawyer.
A2.CYBERCRIME EFFECTS / The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of how the cybercrime could affect VL Bank’s enterprise continuity. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no support, of how the cybercrime could affect VL Bank’s enterprise continuity. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited support, of how the cybercrime could affect VL Bank’s enterprise continuity. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate support, of how the cybercrime could affect VL Bank’s enterprise continuity. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial support, of how the cybercrime could affect VL Bank’s enterprise continuity.
A2A.TECHNOLOGY / The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how VL Bank could use technology to prevent the cybercrime in the case scenario. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no support, of how VL Bank could use technology to prevent the cybercrime in the case scenario. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited support, of how VL Bank could use technology to prevent the cybercrime in the case scenario. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate support, of how VL Bank could use technology to prevent the cybercrime in the case scenario. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial support, of how VL Bank could use technology to prevent the cybercrime in the case scenario.
A3.CONTROLS / The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of information security and assurance controls that could mitigate future attacks of this kind at VL Bank. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of information security and assurance controls that could mitigate future attacks of this kind at VL Bank. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of information security and assurance controls that could mitigate future attacks of this kind at VL Bank. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of information security and assurance controls that could mitigate future attacks of this kind at VL Bank. / The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of information security and assurance controls that could mitigate future attacks of this kind at VL Bank.
A3A.ALIGNMENT / The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how the controls align to regulatory requirements and standards. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no support, of how the controls align to regulatory requirements and standards. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited support, of how the controls align to regulatory requirements and standards. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate support, of how the controls align to regulatory requirements and standards. / The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial support, of how the controls align to regulatory requirements and standards.
B.SOURCES / When the candidate uses sources, the candidate does not provide in-text citations and references. / When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides only some in-text citations and references. / When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with major deviations from APA style. / When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with minor deviations from APA style. / When the candidate uses sources, the candidate provides appropriate in-text citations and references with no readily detectable deviations from APA style, OR the candidate does not use sources.