Analytical

IM-1

IAW TP 350-70-7 Appendix C Assessment Instruments

IAW TP 350-70-7 appendix C Assessment Instruments

IAW TP 350-70-7 appendix C Assessment Instruments

NAME:

ASSIGNMENT TITLE: DATE:

FACILITATOR:

RATING UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY SUPERIOR

RANGE 0 – 69.9 70 – 89.9 90 – 100

GRADE

COGNATIVE LEVEL ATTAINED: Higher levels include characteristics of lower levels.

ANALYZING: Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how

the parts relate to each other and to an overall structure or

purpose through differentiating, organizing, and

attributing.

APPLYING: Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or implementing.

UNDERSTANDING: Constructing meaning from oral, written, and graphic

messages through interpreting, exemplifying, classifying,

summarizing, inferring, comparing, and explaining.

REMEMBERING: Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge

from long-term memory.

Writing Assignment

Analyze and evaluate the major points of your case study for research to write your analytical essay.

Use your time to develop a deep understanding of your topic to fully explain how the principles of mission command were utilized. You are required to give an in depth introduction of your topic.

Provide transitional sentences from one topic to the next. Then develop the body of the paper fully

using no less than 3 full pages and no more than 5 pages, this does not include the title, abstract and

references page. Finally, provide a conclusion. Provide a minimum of two references for your

references page. Ensure you use Times New Roman 12 point font and the current APA Writing Style.

Facilitator’s Comments:

Facilitator’s Signature:

Learner’s Comments:

Learner’s Signature:

IM-2

US ARMY SERGEANTS MAJOR ACADEMY

Senior Leader Course

Common Core

Form 1009W, Assessing Writing

INTRODUCTION 10%

Unsatisfactory

0-6.9 pts.

Satisfactory

7-8.9 pts.

Superior

9-10 pts.

Does not adequately convey topic.

Does not describe subtopics to be

reviewed. Does not support thesis

statement.

Conveys topic, describes

subtopics to be reviewed.

Generally supports Statement.

Strong introduction of topic clearly

delineates subtopics to be

reviewed. Fully supports thesis

statement.

points for introduction

TOPIC BODY 40%

Unsatisfactory

0-27 pts.

Satisfactory

28-35 pts.

Superior

35-40 pts.

Did not introduce any aspect of the

topic or any instances were so

vague as to imply there was much

more information needed. Made

little attempt to correlate the topic

to the overarching theme. The

body is less than three pages.

Partially introduced some of

aspects of the topic. Developed

and linked the topic to the

overarching theme. The body

meets 3-5 pages requirement.

Solidly introduced all aspects of

the topic preparedness. Fully

linked the topic to the overarching

theme. The body meets 3-5 pages

requirement.

points for body

SEQUENCING AND TRANSITION 10%

Unsatisfactory

0-6 pts.

Satisfactory

7-8 pts.

Superior

9-10 pts.

Little evidence material is

logically organized into topic,

subtopics or related to topic.

Many transitions are unclear or

nonexistent.

Most material clearly related to

main topic and subtopic. Material

may not be organized within

subtopics. Attempts to provide

variety of transitions.

Strong organization and

integration of material within

subtopics. Strong transitions

linking subtopics, and main topic.

points for sequencing and transition

GRAMMAR AND CORRECTNESS 10%

Unsatisfactory

0-6 pts.

Satisfactory

7-8 pts.

Superior

9-10 pts.

Grammatical errors or spelling

& punctuation substantially

detract from the paper.

Very few grammatical, spelling or

punctuation errors interfere with

reading the paper.

The paper is free of grammatical

errors and spelling & punctuation.

points for grammar and correctness

READABILITY (sentence structure) 10%

Unsatisfactory

0-6 pts.

Satisfactory

7-8 pts.

Superior

9-10 pts.

Word choice is informal in tone.

Writing is choppy, with many

awkward or unclear passages.

Writing has minimal awkward or

unclear passages.

Writing flows and is easy to

follow.

points for readability

APA FORMATTING 10%

IM-3

Unsatisfactory

0-6.9 pts.

Satisfactory

7-8.9 pts.

Superior

9-10pts.

Errors in APA style detract

substantially from the paper.

No more than 3 errors in APA

style that do not detract from the

paper.

No errors in APA style.

Possesses a Scholarly style.

points for formatting

REFERENCES 10%

Unsatisfactory

0-6.9 pts.

Satisfactory

7-8.9 pts.

Superior

9-10 pts.

No reference. One reference. 2 references. More than 2 references.

points for references

TOTAL POINTS

1. NAME:
2. ASSIGNMENT TITLE: Operation Anaconda Case Study Analytical Essay
3. FACILITATOR:
4. 0 699GRADE: X
5. 70 899GRADE:
6. 90 100GRADE:
7. Facilitators Comments:
8. Learners Comments:
9. TOTAL POINTS: 0
10. Date1_af_date:
11. introduction:
12. body:
13. sequencing and transition:
14. grammar and correctness:
15. readability:
16. formatting:
17. references: