Skip to content
Home » Project 1 – Employee Handbook (IT Security) Hide Assignment Information Turnitin

Project 1 – Employee Handbook (IT Security) Hide Assignment Information Turnitin

    Project 1 – Employee Handbook (IT Security)
    Hide Assignment Information
    Turnitin®
    Turnitin® enabledThis assignment will be submitted to Turnitin®.
    Instructions
    Open this item from the Assignments menu to view the rubric and download the attached detailed assignment descriiption.
    Due Date
    Feb 1, 2022 11:59 PM
    Attachments
    CSIA 413 Project #1 Employee Handbook v2021.docx (56.7 KB) Hide Rubrics
    Rubric Name: Project 1: Employee Handbook
    This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.
    Executive Summary Excellent
    Outstanding
    Acceptable
    Needs Improvement
    Needs Significant Improvement
    Missing or Unacceptable
    Criterion Score
    Executive Summary for the Policy Briefing Package
    10 points
    The Executive Summary provided an excellent summary of the policy package’s purpose and contents. Information about the case study company was well integrated into the summary. Each policy was individually introduced and clearly explained. The material was well organized and easy to read.
    8.5 points
    The Executive Summary provided an outstanding summary of the policy package’s purpose and contents. Information about the case study company was integrated into the summary. Each policy in the briefing package was individually introduced and briefly explained. The material was well organized and easy to read.
    7 points
    The Executive Summary provided an acceptable overview of the contents of the policy package. Information about the case study company was used in the summary. Each policy in the briefing package was named and briefly explained.
    6 points
    The Executive Summary provided an overview of the policy package. Information about the case study company was mentioned.
    4 points
    An executive summary was provided but lacked details as to the purpose and contents of the policy package and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.
    0 points
    No work submitted.
    Score of Executive Summary for the Policy Briefing Package,/ 10
    This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.
    Acceptable Use Policy Excellent
    Outstanding
    Acceptable
    Needs Improvement
    Needs Significant Improvement
    Missing or Unacceptable
    Criterion Score
    Policy Introduction
    10 points
    The Acceptable Use Policy contained an excellent introduction which addressed five or more specific characteristics of the company’s business, legal & regulatory, and/or enterprise IT environments and addressed the reasons why employees must comply with this policy. Compliance requirements are addressed and contact information is provided for questions about the policy.
    8.5 points
    The Acceptable Use Policy contained an outstanding introduction which addressed three or more specific characteristics of the company’s business, legal & regulatory, and/or enterprise IT environments and addressed the reasons why employees must comply with this policy. Compliance requirements are addressed and contact information is provided for questions about the policy.
    7 points
    The introduction for the Acceptable Use Policy was customized for the case study company. Three or more specific characteristics of the company’s business, legal & regulatory, and/or enterprise IT environments were incorporated into the policy. Compliance requirements were addressed.
    6 points
    The introduction to the Acceptable Use Policy mentions the case study company and compliance requirements.
    4 points
    The Acceptable Use Policy was built from a sample template or list of “recommended” AUP contents without customization for the case study company. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)
    0 points
    No work submitted.
    Score of Policy Introduction,/ 10
    Policy Content
    20 points
    The Acceptable Use Policy was well organized (including 5 or more section headings for topics) and easy to understand. The policy addressed 15 or more employee responsibilities (15 or more separate policy statements) including all topics listed in the assignment.
    18 points
    The Acceptable Use Policy was well organized (including 3 or more section headings for topics) and easy to understand. The policy addressed 12 or more employee responsibilities (12 or more separate policy statements) including all topics listed in the assignment.
    16 points
    The Acceptable Use Policy was well organized and easy to understand. The policy addressed 10 or more employee responsibilities (as separate policy statements) including at least 7 items listed in the assignment.
    14 points
    Organization and appearance need improvement. The policy addressed least 7 items listed in the assignment (as separate policy statements).
    10 points
    The Acceptable Use Policy was disorganized and difficult to understand. OR, the policy was significantly lacking in content (7 or fewer policy statements). (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)
    0 points
    No work submitted.
    Score of Policy Content,/ 20
    This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.
    Work From Home (WFH) Policy Excellent
    Outstanding
    Acceptable
    Needs Improvement
    Needs Significant Improvement
    Missing or Unacceptable
    Criterion Score
    Policy Introduction
    10 points
    The WFH Policy contained an excellent introduction which addressed three or more specific characteristics of the company’s business, legal & regulatory, and/or enterprise IT environments and addressed the reasons why employees must comply with this policy. Compliance requirements are addressed and contact information is provided for questions about the policy.
    8.5 points
    The WFH Policy contained an outstanding introduction which addressed two or more specific characteristics of the company’s business, legal & regulatory, and/or enterprise IT environments and addressed the reasons why employees must comply with this policy. Compliance requirements are addressed and contact information is provided for questions about the policy.
    7 points
    The introduction for the WFH Policy was customized for the case study company. One or more specific characteristics of the company’s business, legal & regulatory, and/or enterprise IT environments were incorporated into the policy. Compliance requirements were addressed.
    6 points
    The introduction to the WFH Policy mentions the case study company and compliance requirements.
    4 points
    The WFH Policy was built from a sample template or list of “recommended” WFH contents without customization for the case study company. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)
    0 points
    No work submitted.
    Score of Policy Introduction,/ 10
    Policy Content
    15 points
    The WFH Policy was well organized (including 3 or more section headings for topics) and easy to understand. The policy addressed 10 or more employee responsibilities (10 or more separate policy statements) including all topics listed in the assignment.
    13.5 points
    The WFH Policy was well organized (including at least 3 section headings for topics) and easy to understand. The policy addressed 7 or more employee responsibilities (7 or more separate policy statements) including all topics listed in the assignment.
    12 points
    The WFH Policy was well organized and easy to understand. The policy addressed 5 or more employee responsibilities (5 or more separate policy statements) including at least 3 topics listed in the assignment.
    9 points
    Organization and appearance need improvement. The WFH policy addressed at least 3 items listed in the assignment (as separate policy statements).
    6 points
    The WFH Policy was disorganized and difficult to understand. OR, the policy was significantly lacking in content (fewer than 3 specific policy statements). (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)
    0 points
    No work submitted.
    Score of Policy Content,/ 15
    This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.
    Digital Media Sanitization, Reuse, & Destruction Policy Excellent
    Outstanding
    Acceptable
    Needs Improvement
    Needs Significant Improvement
    Missing or Unacceptable
    Criterion Score
    Policy Introduction
    5 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy contained an excellent introduction which addressed five or more specific characteristics of the company’s business and/or legal & regulatory environments which impose requirements for this policy. Compliance requirements are addressed and contact information is provided for questions about the policy.
    4 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy contained an outstanding introduction which addressed three or more specific characteristics of the company’s business and/or legal & regulatory environments which impose requirements for this policy. Compliance requirements are addressed and contact information is provided for questions about the policy.
    3 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy contained an acceptable introduction which mentioned the company’s business and/or legal & regulatory environments as a source of requirements for this policy. Compliance requirements are addressed and contact information is provided for questions about the policy.
    2 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy contained an introduction which mentioned the reasons why this policy exists and why employees must comply with it.
    1 point
    The policy was built from a template or list of “best practices” with no customization for the case study company. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)
    0 points
    No work submitted.
    Score of Policy Introduction,/ 5
    Policy Content
    10 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy was well organized (including 3 or more section headings for topics) and easy to understand. The policy addressed all three functions (sanitization, reuse, and destruction) and included 9 or more separate policy statements.
    8.5 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy was well organized (including 3 or more section headings for topics) and easy to understand. The policy addressed all three functions (sanitization, reuse, and destruction) and included 7 or more separate policy statements.
    7 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy was well organized and easy to understand. The policy addressed all three functions (sanitization, reuse, and destruction) and included 5 or more separate policy statements.
    6 points
    The media sanitization, reuse, and destruction policy addressed at least two of the three functions (sanitization, reuse, and destruction) and included 3 or more separate policy statements.
    4 points
    The policy addressed employee responsibilities for erasure and destruction of media but lacked important details / information. (Or, inappropriate or excessive copying from other authors’ work.)
    0 points
    No work submitted.
    Score of Policy Content,/ 10
    This table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.
    Professionalism Excellent
    Outstanding
    Acceptable
    Needs Improvement
    Needs Significant Improvement
    Missing or Unacceptable
    Criterion Score
    Addressed security issues using standard terms (e.g. confidentiality, integrity, availability, non-repudiation, authenticity, accountability, auditability, etc.).
    5 points
    Demonstrated excellence in the use of standard cybersecurity terminology to support discussion of security issues. Appropriately used 5 or more standard terms.
    4 points
    Discussion showed an outstanding understanding and integration of standard cybersecurity terminology to support discussion of security issues. Appropriately used 4 or more standard terms.
    3 points
    Correctly used standard cybersecurity terminology to support discussion of security issues. Appropriately used 3 or more standard terms.
    2 points
    Correctly used standard cybersecurity terminology to support discussion of security issues. Appropriately used 2 or more standard terms.
    1 point
    Attempted to use standard cybersecurity terminology to support discussion of security issues.
    0 points
    Did not integrate standard cybersecurity terminology into the discussion OR misused or incorrectly defined standard cybersecurity terms.
    Score of Addressed security issues using standard terms (e.g. confidentiality, integrity, availability, non-repudiation, authenticity, accountability, auditability, etc.).,/ 5
    Organization & Appearance
    5 points
    Submitted work shows outstanding organization and the use of color, fonts, titles, headings and sub-headings, etc. is appropriate to the assignment type.
    4 points
    Submitted work has minor style or formatting flaws but still presents a professional appearance. Submitted work is well organized and appropriately uses color, fonts, and section headings (per the assignment’s directions).
    3 points
    Organization and/or appearance of submitted work could be improved through better use of fonts, color, titles, headings, etc. OR Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Professional appearance could be improved.
    2 points
    Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Organization and professional appearance need substantial improvement.
    1 point
    Submitted work meets minimum requirements but has major style and formatting errors. Work is disorganized and needs to be rewritten for readability and professional appearance.
    0 points
    Submitted work is poorly organized and formatted. Writing and presentation are lacking in professional style and appearance. Work does not reflect college level writing skills. Or, no submission.
    Score of Organization & Appearance,/ 5
    Execution
    10 points
    No word usage, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. All quotations (copied text) are properly marked and cited using a professional format (APA format recommended but not required.)
    8.5 points
    Work contains minor errors in word usage,grammar, spelling or punctuation which do not significantly impact professional appearance. All quotations (copied text) are properly marked and cited using a professional format (APA format recommended but not required.)
    7 points
    Errors in word usage, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which detract from professional appearance of the submitted work. All quotations (copied text) are properly marked and cited using a professional format (APA format recommended but not required.)
    6 points
    Submitted work has numerous errors in word usage, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which detract from readability and professional appearance. Punctuation errors may include failure to properly mark quoted or copied material (an attempt to name original source is required).
    4 points
    Submitted work is difficult to read / understand and has significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, or word usage. Significant errors in presentation of copied text (lacks proper punctuation and failed to attribute material to original source).
    0 points
    No work submitted. OR, work contains significant instances of cut-and-paste without proper citing / attribution to the original work or author.

    How to create Testimonial Carousel using Bootstrap5

    Clients' Reviews about Our Services