Topic 6

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Evaluation of Power Bases

Evaluation of Power Bases

0 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is clear and provides citations and examples.

15 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is thorough and provides citations and specific examples.

Evaluation of Influence Tactics

Evaluation of Influence Tactics

0 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is clear and provides citations and examples.

15 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is thorough and provides citations and specific examples.

Evaluation of Leadership Style

Evaluation of Leadership Style

0 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is clear and provides citations and examples.

15 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is thorough and provides citations and specific examples

Evaluation of Outcome

Evaluation of Outcome

0 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is provided, but at a cursory level. There is some explanation to show the impact the leader has on organizational outcomes.

13.05 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is clear and integrated. There is a complete explanation with citations to show the impact the leader has on organizational outcomes.

15 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is thorough and well-integrated. There is detailed evidence provided through citations to show the impact the leader has on organizational outcomes.

Servant Leadership Discussion

Servant Leadership Discussion

0 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is clear and includes citations.

15 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is thorough and includes citations to support the learner’s claims.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

3.7 points

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

3.95 points

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

4.35 points

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

5 points

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.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

3.7 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

3.95 points

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.

4.35 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

5 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

3.7 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

3.95 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

4.35 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

3.7 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

3.95 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

4.35 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

5 points

All format elements are correct.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

3.7 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

3.95 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

4.35 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Evaluation of Power Bases

Evaluation of Power Bases

0 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is clear and provides citations and examples.

15 points

Evaluation of power bases used by the leader affiliated with a current ethics-related issue is thorough and provides citations and specific examples.

Evaluation of Influence Tactics

Evaluation of Influence Tactics

0 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is clear and provides citations and examples.

15 points

Evaluation of influence tactics used by the leader is thorough and provides citations and specific examples.

Evaluation of Leadership Style

Evaluation of Leadership Style

0 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is clear and provides citations and examples.

15 points

Evaluation of leadership style, effectiveness, and whether the leader supports the values of conscious capitalism is thorough and provides citations and specific examples

Evaluation of Outcome

Evaluation of Outcome

0 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is provided, but at a cursory level. There is some explanation to show the impact the leader has on organizational outcomes.

13.05 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is clear and integrated. There is a complete explanation with citations to show the impact the leader has on organizational outcomes.

15 points

Evaluation of the outcome or potential outcome of the situation is thorough and well-integrated. There is detailed evidence provided through citations to show the impact the leader has on organizational outcomes.

Servant Leadership Discussion

Servant Leadership Discussion

0 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant.

11.1 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation.

11.85 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is provided, but at a cursory level.

13.05 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is clear and includes citations.

15 points

A discussion of servant leadership, how the situation would be different with respect to power bases, influence tactics, and leadership style, as well as an explanation of how personal values are influenced by conscious capitalism, is thorough and includes citations to support the learner’s claims.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

3.7 points

Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.

3.95 points

Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.

4.35 points

Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

5 points

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.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

3.7 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

3.95 points

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.

4.35 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

5 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

3.7 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

3.95 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

4.35 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

5 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

3.7 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

3.95 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

4.35 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

5 points

All format elements are correct.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

3.7 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

3.95 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

4.35 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

5 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.