Criterion
|
4
A-level qualities (90100) |
3
B-level qualities (8089) |
2
C-level qualities (7079) |
1
F-level qualities (below 70) |
Score
|
| Purpose |
Introduces and presents paper effectively and clearly; purpose is readily apparent to the reader |
Introduces and presents paper adequately; purpose is clear throughout the paper |
Introduces and presents paper somewhat effectively; writing has a clear purpose but may sometimes digress from it |
Introduces and presents paper poorly; purpose is generally unclear |
|
| Development and content |
Develops paper in a sophisticated manner, providing a robust and accurate analysis of the organizational situation and the leader in question |
Develops paper as assigned, providing an accurate and effective analysis of the organizational situation |
Does not fully develop paper as assigned, may fail to provide an accurate picture or an effective analysis of the organization or leader; analysis is basic or general |
Paper is undeveloped and completely misunderstands the need to analyze the organization and or leader; paper does not relate to the assignment |
|
| Makes appropriate and powerful suggestions for change and indicates how they would positively affect the organization; addresses urgency and motivation effectively |
Makes logical and practical suggestions for change and indicates how they would positively affect the organization; addresses urgency and motivation |
Suggestions for change are somewhat vague and there may be no indication of how they would positively affect the organization; leaves out a dicussion of either urgency or motivation |
Makes little or no attempt to suggest ways to make positive changes in the organization's leadership |
|
| Refers to both the Lussier and Kotter texts frequently and in highly appropriate ways; provides a critical assessment of both texts and makes reasonable and insightful comments |
Refers to both the Lussier and Kotter text in appropriate ways and makes effective use of their concepts | Refers to both Lussier and Kotter texts but does so in a vague or confusing manner or neglects to refer to one of the texts at all; applies one or both texts in ways that are inappropriate or impractical |
Does not refer to the Lussier or the Kotter texts at all or makes statements that indicate little understanding of these text concepts; applications are unreasonable |
|
| Documentation and support |
Ideas are supported effectively and sources are clearly attributed |
Ideas are generally supported and paper includes clear attribution |
Attribution may be present, but sources are questionable or style is incorrect; some statements are unsubstantiated and the source of some ideas is unclear |
Attribution is missing, or sources given are poorly chosen, or sources have not been used |
|
| Organization |
Arranges ideas clearly and logically to support the purpose or argument; ideas flow smoothly and are effectively linked; reader can follow the line of reasoning |
Arranges ideas adequately to support the purpose or argument; links between ideas are generally clear; reader can follow the line of reasoning for the most part |
Arranges ideas adequately, in general, although ideas sometimes fail to make sense together; reader remains fairly clear about what writer intends |
Arranges ideas illogically; ideas frequently fail to make sense together; reader cannot identify a line of reasoning and becomes frustrated or loses interest |
|
| Writing mechanics |
Writing demonstrates a sophisticated clarity, conciseness, and correctness |
Writing is accomplished in terms of clarity and conciseness and contains only a few errors |
Writing lacks clarity or conciseness and contains numerous errors |
Writing is unfocused, rambling, or contains serious errors |
|
| APA format |
Uses APA format accurately and consistently |
Uses APA format with minor violations |
Reflects incomplete knowledge of APA format |
Does not use APA format |
|
Total: |
|