| Course Code | Class Code |
| LDR-800 | LDR-800-O503 | Ethics v. Right and Wrong | 200.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less Than Satisfactory (73.00%) | Satisfactory (82.00%) | Good (91.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 80.0% |
| Discussion in Support of the Proposition | 20.0% | A discussion in support of the proposition is not present | A discussion in support of the proposition is present, but incomplete or illogical. Supportive research is not present or is inappropriate. | A discussion in support of the proposition is present, but cursory. It is supported by little or antiquated scholarly research. | A discussion in support of the proposition is complete and thorough. It is supported by sufficient scholarly research, some of which is outdated. | A discussion in support of the proposition is thorough, detailed, and insightful. It is supported by sufficient current scholarly research. |
| Discussion In Opposition to the Proposition | 20.0% | A discussion in opposition to the proposition is not present | A discussion in opposition to the proposition is present, but incomplete or illogical. Supportive research is not present or is inappropriate. | A discussion in opposition to the proposition is present, but cursory. It is supported by little or antiquated scholarly research. | A discussion in opposition to the proposition is complete and thorough. It is supported by sufficient scholarly research, some of which is outdated. | A discussion in opposition to the proposition is thorough, detailed, and insightful. It is supported by sufficient current scholarly research. |
| Research Based Statement of and Rational for Your Position | 30.0% | A research based statement of and rational for your position is not present | A research based statement of and rational for your position is present, but illogical. Supportive research is not present or is inappropriate. | A research based statement of and rational for your position is present, but cursory. It is supported by little or antiquated scholarly research. | A research based statement of and rational for your position is complete and thorough. It is supported by sufficient scholarly research, some of which is outdated. | A research based statement of and rational for your position is thorough, detailed, and insightful. It is supported by sufficient current scholarly research. |
| Synthesis and Argument | 10.0% | No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources. | Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 15.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 10.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. | Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Mechanics of Writing | 5.0% | Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Format | 5.0% |
| APA Format | 5.0% | Required format is rarely followed correctly. No reference page is included. No in-text citations are used. | Required format elements are missing or incorrect. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Reference page is present. However, in-text citations are inconsistently used. | Required format is generally correct. However, errors are present (e.g. font, cover page, margins, and in-text citations). Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented though some errors are present. | Required format is used, but minor errors are present (e.g. headings and direct quotes). Reference page is present and includes all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. | The document is correctly formatted. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |