C200 managing organizations and leading people *****THE ORGANIZTION CAN EITHER BE BURGER KING OR THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS***** For this task, you will write a paper on an existing organization w
RUBRIC
A:SIGNATURE THEMES REPORT
| NOT EVIDENT A PDF copy of the “Signature Themes” report is not provided. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE Not applicable. | COMPETENT A PDF copy of the “Signature Themes” report is provided. |
A1:REFLECTION ON CLIFTONSTRENGTHS
| NOT EVIDENT A reflection on the results of the 5 categorical strengths from the CliftonStrengths assessment is not provided. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE The reflection on the results of the 5 categorical strengths from the CliftonStrengths assessment is not supported by specific details of each strength, or it does not include what each may indicate about personal leadership. | COMPETENT The reflection on the results of the 5 categorical strengths from the CliftonStrengths assessment is supported by specific details of each strength and includes what each may indicate about personal leadership. |
B1:PERSONAL LEADERSHIP STRENGTHS
| NOT EVIDENT The submission does not evaluate 3 personal leadership strengths. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission evaluates 3 personal leadership strengths, but the evaluation does not use the chosen scholarly leadership theory, or it does not include specific details of each strength or specific examples to support how each strength relates to the chosen theory. Or the evaluation is not supported by at least 1 appropriate scholarly source. | COMPETENT The submission evaluates 3 personal leadership strengths using the chosen scholarly leadership theory, and the evaluation includes specific details of each strength and specific examples to support how each strength relates to the chosen theory. The evaluation is supported by at least 1 appropriate scholarly source. |
B2:PERSONAL LEADERSHIP WEAKNESSES
| NOT EVIDENT The submission does not evaluate 3 personal leadership weaknesses. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission evaluates 3 personal leadership weaknesses, but the evaluation does not use the chosen scholarly leadership theory, or it does not include specific details of each weakness or specific examples to support how each weakness relates to the chosen theory. Or the evaluation is not supported by at least 1 appropriate scholarly source. | COMPETENT The submission evaluates 3 personal leadership weaknesses using the chosen scholarly leadership theory, and the evaluation includes specific details of each weakness and specific examples to support how each weakness relates to the chosen theory. The evaluation is supported by at least 1 scholarly appropriate source. |
B3:RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PERSONAL LEADERSHIP
| NOT EVIDENT The submission does not recommend 3 actionable items to improve personal leadership effectiveness. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission recommends 3 actionable items to improve personal leadership effectiveness, but the recommendations do not align to the chosen scholarly leadership theory or do not include specific examples to support how each actionable item relates to the chosen theory. Or the recommendations are not supported by at least 1 appropriate scholarly source. | COMPETENT The submission recommends 3 actionable items to improve personal leadership effectiveness, and the recommendations align to the chosen scholarly leadership theory and includes specific examples to support how each actionable item relates to the chosen theory. The recommendation is supported by at least 1 appropriate scholarly source. |
C:SMART GOALS
| NOT EVIDENT A discussion of 2 short-term goals that will help improve personal leadership is not provided. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE The discussion includes 2 short-term goals that will help improve personal leadership, but the goals do not adhere to each of the SMART criteria (i.e., specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound). | COMPETENT The discussion includes 2 short-term goals that will help improve personal leadership, and the goals adhere to each of the SMART criteria (i.e., specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound). |
C1:SPECIFIC ACTIONS
| NOT EVIDENT A discussion of at least 2 actions to reach each of the SMART goals discussed in part C is not provided. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE The discussion includes at least 2 actions to reach each of the SMART goals discussed in part C, but it does not include specific details of each action. | COMPETENT The discussion includes specific details of at least 2 actions to reach each of the SMART goals discussed in part C. |
D:APA SOURCES
| NOT EVIDENT The submission does not include in-text citations and references according to APA style for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized but does not demonstrate a consistent application of APA style. | COMPETENT The submission includes in-text citations and references for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized and demonstrates a consistent application of APA style. |
E:PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION
| NOT EVIDENT Content is unstructured, is disjointed, or contains pervasive errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar. Vocabulary or tone is unprofessional or distracts from the topic. | APPROACHING COMPETENCE Content is poorly organized, is difficult to follow, or contains errors in mechanics, usage, or grammar that cause confusion. Terminology is misused or ineffective. | COMPETENT Content reflects attention to detail, is organized, and focuses on the main ideas as prescribed in the task or chosen by the candidate. Terminology is pertinent, is used correctly, and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Mechanics, usage, and grammar promote accurate interpretation and understanding. |
