critiques

( 24 )

Question 1

Research Ethics Challenges: Students will locate, assess and respond to a current/most recent ethical challenges in the immediate, current business environment. Assessments should include the origins and root causes of the ethical issue, how the issue could have been avoided or how it could be ameliorated. using the article evaluation rubic form below These critiques are intended to be cumulative in your understanding of the material and it is expected that as we progress through the material the evaluation will become more complete. A link to the article must be provided for instructor to read. APA fromat is required must not be less than two full page. Students will upload a white paper file, minimum of two pages.

Question 2. Students will go to Google scholor and find a most recent journal article critiques* on Toxic leadership and its effects on organization performance in the military., using the article evaluation rubic form below These critiques are intended to be cumulative in your understanding of the material and it is expected that as we progress through the material the evaluation will become more complete. A link to the article must be provided for instructor to read. APA fromat is required must not be less than two full page. NB. Teacher dont want direct quote use from article teacher wants what every quote use must be in own words and sited appropriately in APA format.

Please use the below format and template filed out completely for Question 1 and 2. Note each received answer must be in a separated file with different source:

Answers to question one and two must be presented in the below Research / Journal article critique template. Except question 3 below.

3. Write a one full page paper for Discussion of Meg Whitman, Henry Ford and Bill Gates (Industry                     Leaders)  

RESEARCH/ JOURNAL ARTICLE CRITIQUE

DATE:
YOUR NAME:
Theme/Title of your research proposal	[ Place the overall theme/research question of your research here]
COMPLETE APA REFERENCE For ARTICLE (in correct form):	[Author, date, peer-reviewed journal article title, publication title]

( SUMMARY (not to exceed 50% of review): )

Look for the what, where, who, when, how and particularly the why of the article.

( CRITICAL ANALYSIS: )

What were the strong points of the Journal Article? Timely, relevant, important, applicable?

Make sure to include the type of methodology used. Did the author’s conclusions appear to be supported by the data? Recommendations for future research? Weaknesses in data collection or analysis? Was method chosen appropriate? What would you have done differently?

( PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: )

Answer the “So what?” question.

References:

Make sure to cite using APA style!

( 25 )

Assignment Cover Sheet

Course	ADM-545 Values & Ethics in Administration
Title of Assignment
Submitted by:
Date of Submission:

CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORSHIP:

By including this cover sheet I certify that I am the author of this submittal and that any assistance I received in its preparation is fully acknowledged and disclosed. I have also cited any sources from which I used data, ideas, or words, either quoted directly or paraphrased. I also certify that this paper was prepared by me specifically for this course only and was not previously submitted in any other course. I have read the PACE Academic Dishonesty Policy regarding cheating and plagiarism and understand its consequences and penalties.

Rubric for Journal Article Critiques

Criterion	Excellent 50	Very Good 40	Good 30	Competent 20	Inadequate 10
A. Overall quality of the presentation: preparation, clarity, structure, content, journal article used.	Truly exceptional: well prepared, very clear, very well structured, compelling content	Strong: prepared, clear, structured, interesting or useful content	Satisfactory: prepared, relatively clear, fair structure, somewhat interesting content	Barely adequate: somewhat clear, somewhat structured, adequate content	Very weak: demonstrating lack of preparation, lack of clarity, lack of structure, and minimal content
B. Critique of journal article	Truly exceptional: very responsive, incisive, informative	Strong: responsive, direct, generally informative	Satisfactory: somewhat responsive, generally direct, somewhat informative	Barely adequate: weak or short responses, somewhat rambling, little information	Very weak: not responsive, rambling, not informative

Journal Article Critique Grade = Part A, Plus Part B, divided by 2.

Page 16

( 16 )

Rubric for Values & Ethics Forum Evaluation

Criterion	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Competent	Inadequate
1. Overall quality of the presentation: preparation, clarity, structure, content.	Truly exceptional: well prepared, very clear, very well structured, compelling content	Strong: prepared, clear, structured, interesting or useful content	Satisfactory: prepared, relatively clear, fair structure, somewhat interesting content	Barely adequate: somewhat clear, somewhat structured, adequate content	Very weak: demonstrating lack of preparation, lack of clarity, lack of structure, and minimal content
2. Critique of video/chapter topics.	Truly exceptional: very responsive, incisive, informative	Strong: responsive, direct, generally informative	Satisfactory: somewhat responsive, generally direct, somewhat informative	Barely adequate: weak or short responses, somewhat rambling, little information	Very weak: not responsive, rambling, not informative

Score:

Rubric for Values & Ethics in Administration Journal Article Critiques

Criterion	5	4	3	2	0-1
1. Overall quality of the presentation: preparation, clarity, structure, content, journal article used.	Truly exceptional: well prepared, very clear, very well structured, compelling content	Strong: prepared, clear, structured, interesting or useful content	Satisfactory: prepared, relatively clear, fair structure, somewhat interesting content	Barely adequate: somewhat clear, somewhat structured, adequate content	Very weak: demonstrating lack of preparation, lack of clarity, lack of structure, and minimal content
2. Critique of journal article	Truly exceptional: very responsive, incisive, informative	Strong: responsive, direct, generally informative	Satisfactory: somewhat responsive, generally direct, somewhat informative	Barely adequate: weak or short responses, somewhat rambling, little information	Very weak: not responsive, rambling, not informative