This table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method.CriteriaExcellentOutstandingAcceptableNeeds ImprovementNeeds Significant ImprovementMissing or UnacceptableIntroduction or Overview for Cybersecurity Workforce Issues15 points

Provided an excellent introduction or overview of the cybersecurity workforce issues which impact state governments. This overview addressed 5 or more specific political, economic, socio-cultural (included education), and technological factors which contribute to the perceived lack of qualified cybersecurity workers. The overview appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

14 points

Provided an outstanding introduction or overview of the cybersecurity workforce issues which impact state governments. This overview addressed 4 or more specific political, economic, socio-cultural (included education), and technological factors which contribute to the perceived lack of qualified cybersecurity workers. The overview appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

13 points

Provided an acceptable introduction or overview of the cybersecurity workforce issues which impact state governments. This overview addressed 3 or more specific political, economic, socio-cultural (included education), and technological factors which contribute to the perceived lack of qualified cybersecurity workers. The overview appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.

11 points

Provided an overview but the section lacked important details about the project. Information from authoritative sources was cited and used in the overview.

4 points

Attempted to provide an introduction to the project but this section lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.

0 points

The introduction and/or overview sections of the paper were off topic.

/ 15Reasons Behind Cybersecurity Workforce Shortages in State Government15 points

Provided an excellent discussion of the reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified cybersecurity workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 3 or more specific examples specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

10 points

Provided an outstanding discussion of the reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified cybersecurity workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 3 or more specific examples specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

7 points

Provided an acceptable discussion with two or more reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified cybersecurity workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.

6 points

Discussed at least one reason why states have difficulty hiring enough personnel for their cybersecurity positions in state agencies and offices. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

4 points

Attempted to provide information about state hiring difficulties for cybersecurity personnel but the discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.

0 points

This section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide information about hiring in state governments for cybersecurity personnel.

/ 15Non-Cybersecurity Reasons Why States Have Difficulty Hiring Trained & Qualified Workers15 points

Provided an excellent discussion of the “non-cybersecurity” reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 5 or more general examples which were not specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

10 points

Provided an excellent discussion of the “non-cybersecurity” reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided 4 or more general examples which were not specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

7 points

Provided an acceptable discussion of the “non-cybersecurity” reasons why states have difficulty hiring a sufficient number of trained and qualified workers for positions in state agencies and offices. Provided at least one general example which was not specific to the cybersecurity workforce. Appropriately used information from 1 or more authoritative sources.

6 points

Discussed at least one non-cybersecurity reason why states have difficulty hiring enough personnel for their cybersecurity positions in state agencies and offices. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

4 points

Attempted to provide information about non cybersecurity reasons behind state hiring difficulties for cybersecurity personnel but the discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.

0 points

This section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide information about hiring in state governments for cybersecurity personnel.

/ 15Recommendations for Actions to Attract Cybersecurity Talent20 points

Provided an excellent discussion which identified and explained at least five marketing or hiring actions which state governments could take to attract cybersecurity talent and reduce or alleviate a cybersecurity workforce shortage for trained and qualified cybersecurity personnel. These recommendations included 3 or more alternative practices which de-emphasize salary. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources.

18 points

Provided an outstanding discussion which identified and explained at least three marketing or hiring actions which state governments could take to attract cybersecurity talent and reduce or alleviate a cybersecurity workforce shortage for trained and qualified cybersecurity personnel. These recommendations included 2 or more alternative practices which de-emphasize salary. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources.

16 points

Provided an acceptable discussion which identified and briefly explained marketing or hiring actions which state governments could take to attract cybersecurity talent and reduce or alleviate a cybersecurity workforce shortage for trained and qualified cybersecurity personnel. These recommendations included at least one alternative practice which de-emphasized salary. Appropriately used information from  1 or more authoritative sources.

14 points

Recommended at least two hiring practices which could help state governments recruit and retain cyber security personnel.  Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

9 points

Recommended at least one hiring practice which could help state governments recruit and retain cyber security personnel.  The discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.

0 points

Did not address best practices for hiring cybersecurity personnel.

/ 20Summary of Research and Recommendations10 points

Provided an excellent summary of the research and recommendations for this deliverable. Summary was clear, concise, and accurate. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

8.5 points

Provided an outstanding summary of the research and recommendations for this deliverable. Summary was clear and accurate. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

7 points

Provided an acceptable summary of the research and recommendations for this deliverable. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources.

6 points

Provided a summary section but, this section was disorganized or lacked relevant details. Mentioned information from authoritative sources.

4 points

Attempted to provide a summary for this deliverable. But, the summary was not relevant to the deliverable. OR, this section was not well supported by information from authoritative sources.

0 points

The summary was missing.

/ 10Addressed security issues using standard cybersecurity terminology5 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.

/ 5Professionalism Part 1: Consistent Use and Formatting for Citations and Reference List5 points

Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. Sufficient information is provided to allow a reader to find and retrieve the cited sources. Reference list entries and in-text citations are consistently and correctly formatted using an appropriate citation style (APA, MLA, etc.).

4 points

Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. Sufficient information is provided to allow a reader to find and retrieve the cited sources. One or two inconsistencies or errors in format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.

3 points

Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. Sufficient information is provided to allow a reader to find and retrieve the cited sources. No more than 5 inconsistencies or errors in format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries.

2 points

Work has no more than three paragraphs with omissions of citations crediting sources for facts and information. Work contains a reference list containing entries for cited resources. Work contains no more than 10 inconsistencies or errors in format.

1 point

Work attempts to credit sources but demonstrates a fundamental failure to understand and/or consistently apply a professional formatting style for the reference list and/or citations.

0 points

Reference list is missing. Work demonstrates an overall failure to incorporate and/or credit authoritative sources for information used in the paper.

/ 5Professionalism Part 2: Organization & Appearance5 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.

/ 5Professionalism Part 3: Execution10 points

No formatting, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors.

8.5 points

Work contains minor errors in formatting, grammar, spelling or punctuation which do not significantly impact professional appearance.

7 points

Errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which detract from professional appearance of the submitted work.

6 points

Submitted work has numerous errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Work is unprofessional in appearance.

4 points

Submitted work is difficult to read / understand and has significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, or word usage.

0 points

Submitted work is poorly executed OR does not reflect college level work.

/ 10