Theoretical Framework for Leadership

Benchmark - Analysis of a Theoretical Framework for Leadership - Rubric

Collapse All Benchmark - Analysis Of A Theoretical Framework For Leadership - RubricCollapse All

Theoretical Framework, Style, and Leadership Traits in the Work (B)

46.5 points

Criteria Description

Theoretical Framework, Style, and Leadership Traits in the Work (C5.1, 1.1)

5. 5: Excellent

46.5 points

Examination of the theoretical framework, style, and leadership traits in the selected work as well as how the individual has adopted leadership as a vocation, is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details.

4. 4: Good

40.46 points

Examination of the theoretical framework, style, and leadership traits in the selected work as well as how the individual has adopted leadership as a vocation, is complete and includes explanation and relevant supporting details.

3. 3: Satisfactory

36.74 points

Examination of the theoretical framework, style, and leadership traits in the selected work as well as how the individual has adopted leadership as a vocation, is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

34.41 points

Examination of the theoretical framework, style, and leadership traits in the selected work as well as how the individual has adopted leadership as a vocation, is incomplete or insufficient.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Examination of the theoretical framework, style, and leadership traits in the selected work as well as how the individual has adopted leadership as a vocation, is not included.

Qualities and Shortcomings of the Selected Leader (B)

46.5 points

Criteria Description

Qualities and Shortcomings of the Selected Leader (C2.1, 5.1)

5. 5: Excellent

46.5 points

Discussion of the qualities of the selected leader to emulate, including how these qualities inspire followership, and the shortcomings of the leadership approach to overcome, is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details.

4. 4: Good

40.46 points

Discussion of the qualities of the selected leader to emulate, including how these qualities inspire followership, and the shortcomings of the leadership approach to overcome, is complete and includes explanation and relevant supporting details.

3. 3: Satisfactory

36.74 points

Discussion of the qualities of the selected leader to emulate, including how these qualities inspire followership, and the shortcomings of the leadership approach to overcome, is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

34.41 points

Discussion of the qualities of the selected leader to emulate, including how these qualities inspire followership, and the shortcomings of the leadership approach to overcome, is incomplete or insufficient.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Discussion of the qualities of the selected leader to emulate or the shortcomings of the leadership approach to overcome is not included.

Supporting References

15.5 points

Criteria Description

Supporting References

5. 5: Excellent

15.5 points

More than the minimum number of relevant references are included and substantially support the claims.

4. 4: Good

13.49 points

Minimum required number of relevant references are included and adequately support the claims.

3. 3: Satisfactory

12.25 points

Minimum required number of references are not included but do not support the claims.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

11.47 points

Supporting references are not included.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

N/A

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

10.85 points

Criteria Description

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

5. 5: Excellent

10.85 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

4. 4: Good

9.44 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

3. 3: Satisfactory

8.57 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

8.03 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

12.4 points

Criteria Description

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

5. 5: Excellent

12.4 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

4. 4: Good

10.79 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

3. 3: Satisfactory

9.8 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

9.18 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

Evidence

7.75 points

Criteria Description

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.

5. 5: Excellent

7.75 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

4. 4: Good

6.74 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

3. 3: Satisfactory

6.12 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

5.74 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

Mechanics of Writing

7.75 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. 5: Excellent

7.75 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout..

4. 4: Good

6.74 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

3. 3: Satisfactory

6.12 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

5.74 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Format/Documentation

7.75 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. 5: Excellent

7.75 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.

4. 4: Good

6.74 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. 3: Satisfactory

6.12 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2. 2: Less Than Satisfactory

5.74 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. 1: Unsatisfactory

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.