MIS 602

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points

CYB-515 CYB-515-O500 Choose Your Roadmap to Certification Part 2: Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) Compliance 85.0

Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) Satisfactory (79.00%) Good (87.00%) Excellent (100.00%) Comments Points Earned

Content 100.0%

Visual Format of Compliance 10.0% Visual graphic format of overview is not submitted. NA NA NA Visual graphic format of overview is submitted

The Number of Control/Sub-controls in the Compliance Requirement 10.0% The number of control/sub-controls in the compliance requirement is not submitted. Insufficient explanation about the number of control/sub-controls in the compliance requirement is submitted. Brief explanation about the number of control/sub-controls in the compliance requirement is submitted. Need more detailed information. Proper explanation about the number of control/sub-controls in the compliance requirement is submitted. Comprehensive explanation about the number of control/sub-controls in the compliance requirement with substantive details is submitted.

Reference another Framework 10.0% Reference another framework that may be used in complement to facilitate meeting of compliance regulations and provide rationale for choosing the other framework is not submitted. Reference another framework that may be used in complement to facilitate meeting of compliance regulations and provide rationale for choosing the other framework is submitted insufficiently. Reference another framework that may be used in complement to facilitate meeting of compliance regulations and provide rationale for choosing the other framework is submitted briefly. Reference another framework that may be used in complement to facilitate meeting of compliance regulations and provide rationale for choosing the other framework is submitted properly. Reference another framework that may be used in complement to facilitate meeting of compliance regulations and provide rationale for choosing the other framework is submitted comprehensively with supporting details.

Discussion of the Authorization and Accreditation Process of FISMA 20.0% Discussion of the authorization and accreditation process of FISMA is not submitted. Insufficient discussion of the authorization and accreditation process of FISMA is submitted. Brief discussion of the authorization and accreditation process of FISMA is submitted. Proper discussion of the authorization and accreditation process of FISMA is submitted. Comprehensive discussion of the authorization and accreditation process of FISMA is submitted with supporting details.

Discussion of How to Apply the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems through the FISMA Process 20.0% Discussion of how to apply the risk management framework to federal information systems through the FISMA process is not submitted. Insufficient discussion of how to apply the risk management framework to federal information systems through the FISMA process is submitted. Brief discussion of how to apply the risk management framework to federal information systems through the FISMA process is submitted. Proper discussion of how to apply the risk management framework to federal information systems through the FISMA process is submitted. Comprehensive discussion of how to apply the risk management framework to federal information systems through the FISMA process is submitted with supporting details.

Sources 10.0% No outside academic sources are used to support major points. Few relevant sources beyond assigned readings are used to support major points. Important relevant sources are neglected. Quoted material and paraphrasing are overused. Sources are adequate, relevant, and extend beyond assigned readings. Quoted material and paraphrasing are included to support major points and writer’s idea development. Sources are academic, current, and/or relevant to support major points. Quoted material and paraphrasing is used effectively and consistently to support the major points and writer’s idea development. Sources are academic, comprehensive, current, and/or relevant. Quoted material and paraphrasing expertly support, extend, and inform ideas but do not substitute for the writer’s own idea development. Sources are well synthesized to support major points.

Argument Logic and Construction 10.0% Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) 5.0% Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately. Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately. Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part. The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly. The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are employed. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Audience-appropriate language is employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech. The writer is clearly in command of standard, written academic English.

Total Weightage 100%