Need assignment by using Creativity and the Role of the Leader By fallowing assessment rubiric IN APA STYLE world limit 2000
Assessment Rubrics: Written Communication Assessment 20% 1 Did not meet expectations 2 Met expectations 3 Exceeded expectations Writing Conventions (grammar, word use, punctuation, mechanics) Frequent grammatical errors and misspellings inhibit readability Informal language, abbreviations and slang are used Few grammatical errors and misspellings (e.g. three or fewer per page) Correct verb tense used Paragraphs flow from one to another Active voice pervasive Free of grammatical errors and misspellings Effective verb tense used Uses phrases and construction that delight as well as inform the reader Primarily active voice Overall Effectiveness of Piece (professional appearance, expression and format) Not formatted to Specifications, Lacking professional appearance Formatting is generally correct, acceptable professional appearance. Assigned format followed explicitly: Exceptional professional appearance Critical Thinking Assessment 80% Intellectual Standards Elements of Reasoning Clarity Relevance Depth Breadth Integration Consistency Information (situation analysis; important data, facts, observations for analysis and decision making) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Concepts (theories, principles, models to be applied in the analysis or exercise) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Points of View (important stakeholders to consider in the analysis and resulting decision(s)) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Assumptions (presuppositions, values or beliefs that must be explicitly stated) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Implications (potential +/‐ outcomes or consequences of decisions or strategies) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Interpretation (articulation of conclusions, interpretation, recommendation based on information, concepts, POV, assumptions and Implications) 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 Critical Thinking and Written Analyses Rubric – Scale Description Levels Criteria 1 Did Not Meet Expectations 2 Met Expectations 3 Exceeded Expectations Clarity Writing is not clear. It is difficult to understand points being made. The writing lacks transitions, and few examples and/or illustrations are provided to support explanation or recommendations. Writing is generally well organized and understood. Transitions are used to facilitate clarity. Some examples and/illustrations are used to support explanation or recommendations. Writing is succinct, precise, effectively organized and without ambiguity. Transitions, explanation and elaboration are extensive to elucidate points. Detailed illustrations and/or examples are used to support explanation or recommendations. Relevance Critical issues/questions are omitted or ignored in the writing. Most of the critical issues/questions are addressed in the writing. All critical issues/questions are addressed completely in the writing Depth of Discussion Ignores bias; Omits arguments Misrepresents issues; Excludes data; Includes but does not detect inconsistencies of information; Ideas contain unnecessary gaps, repetition or extraneous details; Sees no arguments and overlooks differences Detects bias; Recognizes arguments; Categorizes content; Paraphrases data; Sufficient detail to support conclusions and/or recommendations Analysis includes insightful questions; Refutes bias; Discusses issues thoroughly Critiques content; Values information Examines inconsistencies; Offers extensive detail to support conclusions and recommendations; Suggests solutions or implementation Breadth of Discussion Omits arguments or perspectives; Misses major content areas/concepts; Presents few options Covers the breadth of the topic without being superfluous Considers multiple perspectives; Thoroughly delves into the issues/questions; Thoroughly discusses facts relevant to the issues Integration of all Elements of Reasoning Fails to draw conclusions or conclusions rely on author’s authority rather than strength of presentation; Draws faulty conclusions; Shows intellectual dishonesty Formulates clear conclusions with adequate support Assimilates and critically reviews information, uses reasonable judgment, and provides balanced, well justified conclusions Internal Consistency There is little integration across the sections of the paper. Several inconsistencies or contradictions exist. Few of the issues, recommendation and explanations make sense and are well integrated. Sections of the paper are generally well linked/connected. Only minor contradictions exist. Most of the issues, recommendations and explanations make sense and are well integrated. All sections of the paper are linked. There are no contradictions in the writing. All issues, recommendations and explanations make sense and are well integrated Values: Level 1: 10%, Level 2: 50% and Level 3: 100%