Student provides an assessment of a difficult face-to-face conversation he/she experienced in a profession setting, describing the circumstances, the parties involved, the action he/she took to defuse situation or why none were taken, and assesses why actions were effective or not, and what actions might have been useful.

Points:

8.5 (17.00%)

Student provides an explanation of a difficult face-to-face conversation he/she experienced in a profession setting, describing the circumstances, the parties involved, the action he/she took to defuse situation or why none were taken, and explains why actions were effective or not, and what actions might have been useful.

Points:

7.5 (15.00%)

Student provides a cursory description of a difficult conversation with few or vague details about the circumstances and/or actions taken to defuse the situation.

Points:

0 (0.00%)

Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion.

Element 2: Analysis of Conversation

Points:

10 (20.00%)

Student provides a thorough and detailed analysis of the lessons learned relative to his/her communication, identifies areas for improvement assessing why such improvement would be beneficial, and thoroughly explains strategies he/she could implement to make improvements supporting with a strong rationale and resources as to why these strategies would lead to better results in similar circumstances.

Points:

9.3 (18.60%)

Student provides an analysis of the lessons learned relative to his/her communication, identifies areas for improvement assessing why such improvement would be beneficial, and explains strategies he/she could implement to make improvements supporting with a rationale and resources as to why these strategies would lead to better results in similar circumstances.

Points:

8.5 (17.00%)

Student provides an analysis of some of the lessons learned relative to his/her communication, identifies some areas for improvement, and identifies some strategies he/she could implement to make improvements supporting with some rationale and resources as to why these strategies would lead to better results in similar circumstances.

Points:

7.5 (15.00%)

Student provides a cursory description of how the situation impacted his/her approach to communication and describes some ways he/she could improve his/her communication skills.

Points:

0 (0.00%)

Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion.

Element 3: Difficult Conversations in Virtual Settings

Points:

10 (20.00%)

Student provides a thorough and detailed analysis of how he/she would prepare for a similar conversation today, based on lessons learned from previous experiences and thoroughly explains the unique considerations he/she must keep in mind to ensure open communication among individuals who are from different cultures or work remotely, supporting with resources and his/her own experiences and observations.

Points:

9.3 (18.60%)

Student provides an analysis of how he/she would prepare for a similar conversation today, based on lessons learned from previous experiences and explains the unique considerations he/she must keep in mind to ensure open communication among individuals who are from different cultures or work remotely, supporting with resources and his/her own experiences and observations.

Points:

8.5 (17.00%)

Student provides an explanation of how he/she would prepare for a similar conversation today, based on lessons learned from previous experiences and thoroughly describes the unique considerations he/she must keep in mind to ensure open communication among individuals who are from different cultures or work remotely, supporting with resources and his/her own experiences and observations.

Points:

7.5 (15.00%)

Student provides a cursory description of how he/she would prepare for a similar conversation today including a few details he/she must keep in mind to ensure open communication among individuals who are from different cultures or work remotely.

Points:

0 (0.00%)

Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion.

Element 4: Critical Thinking, Analysis, and Synthesis

Points:

5 (10.00%)

Writing exhibits strong evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking; careful examination is made of assumptions and possible biases, with detailed supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New questions may be presented based on synthesis of ideas and input.

Points:

4.65 (9.30%)

Writing exhibits evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking. Examination is made of assumptions and possible biases, with supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New questions are presented based on synthesis of ideas and input.

Points:

4.25 (8.50%)

Writing exhibits some evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking. Examination is made of assumptions and possible biases, with some supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments adequately, but not superbly. New questions are not presented based on synthesis of ideas and input.

Points:

3.75 (7.50%)

Writing exhibits little or no evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking. Examination is not made of assumptions and possible biases. Writing neither synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; nor analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice. Logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments are not exhibited. New questions are not presented based on synthesis of ideas and input.

Points:

0 (0.00%)

Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion.

Element 5: Written Communications

Points:

5 (10.00%)

Writing is clear, logical, well-organized and appropriate. Work is free from spelling and grammar/syntax errors. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism). There are no errors.

Points:

4.65 (9.30%)

Writing is mostly clear, logical, and organized. Few, if any spelling and grammar/syntax issues are noted. Overall, a few sections need additional editing, but generally, work appears proofread. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism). There are one or two minor errors.

Points:

4.25 (8.50%)

The main points are clear and organized. Some spelling, grammar/syntax issues are noted. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism).

Points:

3.75 (7.50%)

There are key sections that lack organization or logical flow. Many spelling, grammar/syntax issues are noted. Work requires additional proofreading.

Points:

0 (0.00%)

Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion.

Element 6: Relevance

Points:

5 (10.00%)

Student effectively and directly integrates discussion/assignment content with relevant and compelling personal experiences, additional research, or current events from credible news sources. Specifically adds a new and/or different insight or perspective on the subject area(s) being discussed or treated in the assignment.

Points:

4.65 (9.30%)

Student offers personal experiences, additional research, or current events from credible news sources, discussing their relevance, but does not specifically add new or different insights or perspectives on the subject areas(s) being discussed or treated in the assignment.

Points:

4.25 (8.50%)

Student offers some examples of how the content of the discussion/application applies to real-world scenarios with general discussion of why those examples are relevant.

Points:

3.75 (7.50%)

Student offers brief or cursory descriptions of personal experiences, additional research, or current events from credible news sources.

Points:

0 (0.00%)

Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion.

Element 7: Formal and Appropriate Documentation of Evidence, Attribution of Ideas (APA Citations)

Points:

5 (10.00%)

Student demonstrates full adherence to scholarly or credible reference requirements and adheres to APA style with respect to source attribution and references. There are no APA errors.

Points:

4.65 (9.30%)

Student demonstrates full adherence to scholarly or credible reference requirements and adheres to APA style with respect to source attribution and references. There are one or two minor errors in APA style or format.

Points:

4.25 (8.50%)

Student addresses guidelines for scholarly or credible references and/or APA style with respect to source attribution and references. Some errors in APA format and style are evident.

Points:

3.75 (7.50%)

Student demonstrates inconsistent adherence to scholarly reference requirements and/or inconsistent adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution and references. Significant and/or numerous errors in APA format and style are evident.

Points:

0 (0.00%)

Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion.

Name:WMBA_6010_Week_2_Reflection_Rubric

Exit