Your final paper will be a 4-5 page paper discussing which communication context (interpersonal, intercultural, small-group, or workplace) needs to improve the most in either your own life. Specifical

Your final paper will be a 4-5 page paper discussing which communication context (interpersonal, intercultural, small-group, or workplace) needs to improve the most in either your own life. Specifically, you need to address a communication context that struggle with or deem in need of improvement. You are to construct an honest and logically “sound” argument with specific examples about how you plan to ethically "change or challenge" your communicative lapses. Those changes or challenges you discuss in your paper need to use examples discussed in class and in the text. At least two weeks before your final paper is due, you will also need to submit a rough draft of your final paper. The rough draft submission is used to receive substantial feedback from your instructor on how to better enhance and develop your argument. You are to include a bibliography with at least 3 sources and use APA format throughout your entire paper. This assignment will be assessed using the common University communication core objective rubric (COR).

Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Scope 40 pts In your paper, you identify some challenge or issue in communication and the positions people take with respect to it. 30 pts In your paper, you identify some challenge or issue in communication. You've identified some of the positions people take with respect to it, but you have not considered some significant ones. 20 pts In your paper, you identify some challenge or issue in communication, but you needed to identify the most significant positions people take with respect to it. 0 pts Content is missing or seems to be for a different assignment. 40 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Level of detail 10 pts You've kept your paper within the 750-1000 word limits. 7 pts Your paper exceeds the word limit by a little, which suggests that you need to revise and edit it to fit the assignment requirements. 7 pts Your paper is just short of the lower length limit, which suggests that you need to you need to add more detail to your analysis. 5 pts Your paper exceeds the word limit a great deal, which suggests that you need to revise and edit it to fit the assignment requirements. 5 pts Your paper is much shorter than the assigned minimum word limit, which suggests that you need to revise and edit it to fit the assignment requirements. 0 pts Content is missing. 10 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Standard Written English 10 pts No noticeable errors in usage, including spelling, grammar, mechanics, and sentence structure. 7 pts The paper contains a few noticeable errors in usage, including spelling, grammar, mechanics, and sentence structure. The errors don't impede the reader's understanding. Please proofread more carefully. 4 pts The paper contains many noticeable errors in usage, including spelling, grammar, mechanics, and sentence structure, that make it difficult to understand in places. Please spend more time revising and editing, or visit the University Success Center for guidance. 0 pts Content is missing or seems to be in first draft stage. It is difficult to read because of errors in usage. 10 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Theory application 20 pts Your paper not only identifies a concept from the course readings that might be used to resolve or improve that problem, but also provides a substantive and insightful analysis of the problem using that concept. 15 pts Your paper identifies a concept from the course readings that might be used to resolve or improve that problem. 10 pts Your paper mentions one or more course concepts briefly, but doesn't show how that concept might relate to the problem you've described. 0 pts Content is missing or seems to be for a different assignment. 20 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Argumentation 20 pts Your paper advances a sophisticated claim, acknowledges counterarguments by fairly representing the opponent from his/her point of view, and elegantly refutes those counterarguments. 15 pts In your paper, you advance a clear claim. You acknowledge counterarguments fairly, but from your own point of view. You have attempted an ethical refutation of those counterarguments. 10 pts Your paper is missing at least one of the following: a clear claim, a fair acknowledgement of counterarguments, or a refutation of those counterarguments. 0 pts No Marks 20 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Critical Thinking COR threshold: 3.0 pts 4 pts Thinking is exemplary, skilled, marked by excellence in clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logicality, and fairness. 3 pts Thinking is competent, effective, accurate and clear, but lacks the exemplary depth, precision, and insight of 4 (excellent). 2 pts Thinking is inconsistent, ineffective; shows a lack of consistent competence; is often unclear, imprecise, inaccurate, and superficial 1 pts Thinking is unskilled and insufficient, marked by imprecision, lack of clarity, superficiality, illogicality, and inaccuracy, and unfairness. -- Total Points: 100